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/basher83/lunar-claude/newgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/basher83/lunar-claudeWrote 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/basher83/lunar-claude/new)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/basher83/lunar-claude/new"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/basher83/lunar-claude/new.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 5.1 | $0.00010 | $0.00475 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00237 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00095 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00047 |
Grade A, and why
new 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 2d 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 — 62 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Start an Architecture Decision Record workflow for: $ARGUMENTS
Use the adr-methodology skill for criteria frameworks and templates.
Phase 1: Context Gathering
Ask the user to describe:
- The Problem: What architectural decision needs to be made? What's driving the need for a decision now?
- Constraints: Timeline, team size, existing technology stack, budget limitations, compliance requirements
- Stakeholders: Who is affected? Who has decision authority? Who needs to be informed?
- Initial Options: Any solutions already under consideration? Prior art or existing patterns?
Wait for user responses before proceeding. Ask follow-up questions if context is insufficient.
Phase 2: Framework Selection
Based on the context, recommend an assessment framework:
- Salesforce Well-Architected (Trusted/Easy/Adaptable): For enterprise decisions with security, UX, and scale concerns
- Technical Trade-off (Operational/Development/Integration): For infrastructure and tooling decisions
- Custom: When neither fits, extract 3-5 key decision drivers and create custom criteria
Explain the recommendation and confirm with user.
Phase 3: Criteria Generation
Generate assessment criteria grouped by the selected framework's pillars. For each criterion:
- Name: Clear, specific identifier
- Rationale: Why this criterion matters for THIS decision (not generic)
- Good looks like: What success means for this criterion
Present criteria as a reviewable list. Ask user to:
- Add missing criteria
- Remove irrelevant criteria
- Adjust importance of criteria
Phase 4: Save State
After user confirms criteria, write to .claude/adr-session.yaml:
topic: "[decision topic]"
status: "criteria_defined"
framework: "[salesforce|technical|custom]"
criteria:
- name: "[criterion name]"
pillar: "[framework pillar]"
rationale: "[why it matters]"
good_looks_like: "[definition of success]"
Create the .claude/ directory if it doesn't exist.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 62 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A f20cea730fd9
new is a command published in the GitHub repository basher83/lunar-claude (22 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 475 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
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.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.