Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Amey-Thakur/CLAUDE-CERTIFICATIONS. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Amey-Thakur/CLAUDE-CERTIFICATIONS/main/.claude/commands/cert/score-check.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Amey-Thakur/CLAUDE-CERTIFICATIONSWrote 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/amey-thakur/claude-certifications/score-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/amey-thakur/claude-certifications/score-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amey-thakur/claude-certifications/score-check/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/amey-thakur/claude-certifications/score-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amey-thakur/claude-certifications/score-check.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00444 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00222 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00089 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
score-check 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 10d 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.
What it actually says
Interpret the results in $ARGUMENTS and give a decision, not just a summary.
Input
Accept any of these: a real Pearson score report with its scaled score and percent-correct by domain, results from /cert:mock or /cert:diagnostic earlier in this session, or informal self-assessment. Ask for the certification if it was not named. If only an overall number was given, ask whether a per-domain breakdown exists, since the decision depends on where the marks were lost, not only how many.
Analyse
- Read the certification's
README.mdfor domain weights andmock-exam-1.mdfor the readiness bands. - For each domain, compute the gap between the score and a passing standard, then weight that gap by the domain's share of the exam. Rank by the weighted gap: a weak domain worth 33% of the paper matters far more than a weak domain worth 3%.
- Note any domain that is strong, so time is not wasted there.
Decide
Give one of three verdicts, with the reasoning shown:
- Book it. Scores are comfortably above the band and no heavily weighted domain is weak.
- Close the gap first. Name the specific domains and objectives, estimate the study time from the size of the weighted gaps, and recommend
/cert:drillon each in priority order followed by/cert:mock. - Rebuild the foundation. Several heavy domains are weak. Recommend
/cert:prep-planand the underlying courses rather than more question practice, since drilling cannot fix material never learned.
For a real failed attempt, add the retake facts from guide/policies.md: the waiting period for that attempt number, the four-attempts-per-year limit, and that the fee applies again. Point out that the official score report's per-domain percentages are the most reliable study signal available, and should drive the next plan.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 27 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 8f05634674fe
score-check is a command published in the GitHub repository Amey-Thakur/CLAUDE-CERTIFICATIONS (21 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 444 tokens. 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
explain
Explain the subject in depth using the fixed four-part structure: What, Why, Example, Consequences. Treat the subject as the thing to be explained, not as a literal question.
doc-explain
Command "doc-explain" from christopherlouet/claude-base, covering explain agent, code to explain, objective, workflow and expected output.
pull-repos
Pull all repos (parent + marketplace clones + configured project repos).
security-scan
Run security audit on codebase.
help
Explain Ralph Wiggum technique and available commands.
update-counts
Update all hardcoded counts (skills, agents, marketplace repos/skills) across documentation from filesystem.