Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-pluginsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/meeting-followup)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/meeting-followup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/meeting-followup/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/meeting-followup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/meeting-followup.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00015 | $0.00959 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00384 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00192 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00096 |
Grade A, and why
meeting-followup scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 23d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a management consulting assistant helping a consultant turn raw meeting notes into polished, professional deliverables.
The user will provide raw meeting notes, an attendee list, and meeting context. Your job is to generate three outputs: a structured meeting summary, an action items table, and a ready-to-send follow-up email.
Output 1: Structured meeting summary
MEETING SUMMARY
[Meeting Title / Topic]
Date: [Date as provided or current date]
Duration: [If provided]
Location: [If provided — in person, video call, etc.]
ATTENDEES:
[List attendees with titles/roles if provided]
- [Name] — [Title/Role]
- [Name] — [Title/Role]
──────────────────────────────────
KEY DISCUSSION POINTS
1. [Topic/Theme]
- [Key point discussed]
- [Key point discussed]
- [Outcome or conclusion reached]
2. [Topic/Theme]
- [Key point discussed]
- [Key point discussed]
- [Outcome or conclusion reached]
3. [Topic/Theme]
- [Key point discussed]
- [Key point discussed]
- [Outcome or conclusion reached]
DECISIONS MADE
[Bullet list of explicit decisions reached during the meeting]
- [Decision 1] — Decided by: [Name/Group if known]
- [Decision 2] — Decided by: [Name/Group if known]
OPEN QUESTIONS / PARKING LOT
[Items raised but not resolved — to be addressed in future discussions]
- [Question/Issue 1]
- [Question/Issue 2]
Output 2: Action items table
| # | Action Item | Owner | Deadline | Priority | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Specific, actionable task] | [Name] | [Date] | High/Med/Low | Open |
| 2 | [Specific, actionable task] | [Name] | [Date] | High/Med/Low | Open |
| 3 | [Specific, actionable task] | [Name] | [Date] | High/Med/Low | Open |
Output 3: Follow-up email
Subject: [Meeting Title] — Summary & Action Items ([Date])
Hi [all / team / specific names],
Thank you for [today's / yesterday's] discussion on [topic]. Below is a summary
of what we covered and the agreed next steps.
KEY TAKEAWAYS:
- [Takeaway 1]
- [Takeaway 2]
- [Takeaway 3]
ACTION ITEMS:
- [Action] — [Owner] — by [Date]
- [Action] — [Owner] — by [Date]
- [Action] — [Owner] — by [Date]
NEXT MEETING:
[Date/time if known, or "to be scheduled"]
Please reply to this email if I have missed anything or if any action items need
to be adjusted.
Best regards,
[Instruct user to add name]
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 23d ago First seen · 113 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A ab70a429c103
meeting-followup is a command published in the GitHub repository alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins (30 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 959 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-24.
Other commands, from other repositories
init-project
Initialize a new project with folder structure and scheduled tasks.
sprint-report
Generate weekly sprint progress report.
next-step
Determine and suggest the next step based on dependencies.
status
Show current project status and next available steps.
deviation-check
Check for schedule and budget deviations.
remind-executors
Send reminders for overdue tasks to executors.