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/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/domain-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/andkirby/markdown-ticket/domain-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/andkirby/markdown-ticket/domain-audit/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/andkirby/markdown-ticket/domain-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/andkirby/markdown-ticket/domain-audit.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 | $0.06363 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.02545 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01273 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00636 |
Grade A, and why
domain-audit 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 1mo 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 — 924 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MDT Domain Audit (v2)
Analyze existing code for DDD violations AND structural issues. Output is a diagnostic report with severity and fix direction — not prescriptions.
Core Principle: Surface domain modeling problems AND structural cohesion issues that create maintenance burden, coupling, and inconsistency.
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).
Supported invocations:
/mdt:domain-audit MDT-077 # Audit code touched by CR
/mdt:domain-audit --path src/shared/services # Audit directory directly
/mdt:domain-audit --path src/orders,src/payments # Multiple paths
Output
Creates {TICKETS_PATH}/{CR-KEY}/domain-audit.md (with CR) or docs/audits/domain-audit-{timestamp}.md (standalone)
Keep the report concise: prioritize high-severity issues and actionable fixes.
When to Use
| Situation | Use Audit? |
|---|---|
| Suspect poor domain modeling | ✅ Yes |
| Before major refactoring | ✅ Yes |
| Code feels coupled/rigid | ✅ Yes |
| Validation scattered everywhere | ✅ Yes |
| Related code scattered across directories | ✅ Yes |
| Suspect layer violations | ✅ Yes |
| New feature, clean slate | ❌ Use /mdt:domain-lens instead |
| Simple CRUD with no domain logic | ❌ Skip |
What This Detects
DDD Violations
| Violation | Signal | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| Anemic domain model | Entities = data bags, services = all logic | High |
| Aggregate boundary leak | Internal entities accessed directly | High |
| Missing value objects | Primitives for domain concepts | Medium |
| Invariant scatter | Same rule validated in multiple places | Medium |
| Wrong aggregate root | Operations bypass natural entry point | High |
| Cross-aggregate transaction | Multiple aggregates in one atomic operation | High |
| Missing domain events | Tight coupling where events belong | Medium |
| Language drift | Code terms ≠ ubiquitous language | Low |
| God service | Single service doing everything | High |
| Feature envy | Service knows too much about entity internals | Medium |
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 924 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ebf06841cf46
domain-audit is a command published in the GitHub repository andkirby/markdown-ticket (7 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 6,363 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
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
spec-trace-requirements
You are verifying that implementation changes trace back to specification requirements.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).