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/axiomantic/spellbookWrote 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/axiomantic/spellbook/dead-code-implement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/dead-code-implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/dead-code-implement/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/axiomantic/spellbook/dead-code-implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/axiomantic/spellbook/dead-code-implement.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 | $0.00016 | $0.00748 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00299 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00150 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
dead-code-implement 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 — 93 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MISSION
Apply dead code deletions from /dead-code-report findings with explicit user approval.
Part of the dead-code- command family.* Run after /dead-code-report completes.
Prerequisites: Report generated with implementation plan.
Invariant Principles
- Never delete without approval - Explicit user consent via AskUserQuestion required for every deletion
- Follow dependency order - Delete dependents before dependencies
- Incremental verification - Run tests after each deletion batch
- Preserve functionality - All existing behavior must remain intact
Phase 7: Implementation Prompt
After presenting report, ask:
Found N items (N lines) of dead code.
Would you like me to:
A. Remove all dead code automatically (I'll create commits)
B. Remove items one-by-one with your approval
C. Create a cleanup branch you can review
D. Just keep the report, you'll handle it
Choose A/B/C/D:
If User Chooses A or B
Follow the writing-plans skill pattern. For each deletion in the ordered plan:
- Show code to be removed (exact lines, location)
- Show grep verification it's unused (paste output)
- Apply deletion
- Re-verify with grep (confirm no references remain)
- Ask: "Run tests now?" — run if yes, then proceed
- Commit after each Phase group from the implementation plan (e.g., "Phase 1: Simple Deletions")
- Final verification (after all deletions): Run full test suite; report results. Verify no new dead code was introduced by the cleanup.
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 · 93 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A a81bc96b405b
dead-code-implement is a command published in the GitHub repository axiomantic/spellbook (10 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 748 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
quick-fix
Implement→review subagent loop with no planning phase, for a fix whose cause is known and whose shape is obvious, however many files it touches. No spec, no worktree, no docs or signals at the end; one audit. Routes to /subagent-diagnose on an unknown cause and to /atomic-plan on an open approach or contract choice.
optimize
Suggest concrete performance improvements for the given file or directory.
debloat
Retroactive whole-repo bloat removal (spec H-2ii). Scores an existing repo on the deterministic bloat axes, writes BLOAT-REPORT.md, and — only behind a passing test-suite safety oracle — proposes gated refactor waves as a PR. The zero-risk adoption hook.
maintain
Run automated maintenance — seeker finds bugs from pod logs and raises GitHub issues, fixer picks them up and creates PRs. Can run as a one-shot or scheduled via /schedule.
map
Generate MAP.md — a relational map of every file, function, signature, and call in the repo.
sanity
Cross-check a dekko callers/uses result against a targeted grep before trusting a low/zero count.