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.
npx agentmods add commands/andkirby/markdown-ticket/assessgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/andkirby/markdown-ticketWrote 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/andkirby/markdown-ticket/assess)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/andkirby/markdown-ticket/assess"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/andkirby/markdown-ticket/assess.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00000 | $0.02987 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01494 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00597 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00299 |
Grade A, and why
assess 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 3d 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 — 391 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MDT Code Fitness Assessment Workflow (v2)
Assess affected code before architecture design. Surfaces the decision: integrate as-is, refactor inline, or split CRs.
Core Principle: Know the state of what you're touching before deciding how to touch it.
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
Session Context
Use {TICKETS_PATH} in all file path templates below (if it's not defined read ticketsPath key from .mdt-config.toml).
Output
File {filename} has {None/Partial} test coverage.
Refactoring without tests risks breaking undocumented behavior.
Behaviors identified for testing:
| Behavior | Type | Risk if Untested |
|---|---|---|
{function} returns {shape} |
Return contract | Silent shape change |
{function} throws {ErrorType} |
Error contract | Wrong error type |
{function} emits {event} |
Side effect | Missing events |
Recommendation: Add behavioral preservation tests before proceeding.
Options: [A] Add tests inline (expand CR scope) [B] Create test CR first (CR-TEST blocks this CR) [C] Proceed without tests (accept risk)
### Step 5: Determine Recommendation
Based on findings:
**Option 1 (Just Integrate)** when:
- All files ✅ Healthy
- Or: ⚠️ files not in direct change path
- Or: Deadline pressure justifies deferring
**Option 2 (Refactor Inline)** when:
- ⚠️ files in direct change path
- Total refactor effort ≤ 4 hours
- Refactoring improves the feature work
**Option 3 (Split CRs)** when:
- 🔴 Critical files in change path
- Total refactor effort > 4 hours
- Refactoring benefits multiple future CRs
- High-risk files (volatile + low tests)
- **🔴 No test coverage on files being refactored** (test CR first)
### Step 6: Present Assessment
```markdown
## Code Fitness Assessment: {CR-KEY}
### Summary
| Verdict | Count | Action |
|---------|-------|--------|
| ✅ Healthy | {N} | Proceed |
| ⚠️ Concerning | {N} | Consider refactoring |
| 🔴 Critical | {N} | Refactor required |
### Affected Files
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 391 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A fe364ed2f366
assess is a command published in the GitHub repository andkirby/markdown-ticket (5 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,987 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.