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/brianmontero18/dev-mcp-tools/qcheckfgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brianmontero18/dev-mcp-toolsWrote 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/brianmontero18/dev-mcp-tools/qcheckf)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/brianmontero18/dev-mcp-tools/qcheckf"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/brianmontero18/dev-mcp-tools/qcheckf.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 | $0.00648 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00324 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00130 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
qcheckf 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.
What it actually says
QCHECKF - Function-Focused Review
When user types "qcheckf", execute this workflow as a SKEPTICAL senior software engineer:
Focus: Writing Functions Best Practices Only
For every MAJOR function added or edited (skip minor changes):
Function Quality Checklist (CLAUDE.md)
- Readability: Can you read the function and HONESTLY easily follow what it's doing? If yes, stop here.
- Complexity: Does the function have very high cyclomatic complexity? (number of independent paths, nesting levels)
- Data Structures: Are there any common data structures and algorithms that would make this function much easier to follow and more robust? (parsers, trees, stacks/queues, etc.)
- Parameters: Are there any unused parameters in the function?
- Type Casts: Are there any unnecessary type casts that can be moved to function arguments?
- Testability: Is the function easily testable without mocking core features (sql queries, redis, etc.)? If not, can it be tested via integration test?
- Dependencies: Does it have any hidden untested dependencies or values that can be factored out into arguments? (Only care about non-trivial dependencies that can actually change)
- Naming: Brainstorm 3 better function names and see if current name is the best, consistent with rest of codebase.
Refactoring Rules
❌ SHOULD NOT refactor out a separate function unless:
- The refactored function is used in more than one place
- The refactored function is easily unit testable while the original is not AND you can't test it any other way
- The original function is extremely hard to follow and you resort to putting comments everywhere
Response Template
🔍 **QCHECKF - Function Review**
**Functions Analyzed:**
**Function**: `functionName` in `file.ts:line`
1. **Readability**: ✅/❌ [Can honestly easily follow? If yes, stop here]
2. **Complexity**: ✅/❌ [Cyclomatic complexity assessment]
3. **Data Structures**: ✅/❌ [Could benefit from trees/parsers/etc?]
4. **Parameters**: ✅/❌ [Any unused parameters?]
5. **Type Casts**: ✅/❌ [Unnecessary casts to move to args?]
6. **Testability**: ✅/❌ [Easy to test without heavy mocking?]
7. **Dependencies**: ✅/❌ [Hidden dependencies to factor out?]
8. **Naming**: ✅/❌ [Better alternatives: name1, name2, name3]
**Refactoring Assessment:**
- Should extract function? ✅/❌ [Reason if yes]
- Reuse potential: [none/low/medium/high]
- Testing benefits: [none/some/significant]
**Recommendations:**
[Specific suggestions for improvement]
**Function Status:** ✅ Solid / ⚠️ Needs tweaks / ❌ Major issues
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 · 50 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A c6e37e1c97f5
qcheckf is a command published in the GitHub repository brianmontero18/dev-mcp-tools (0 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 648 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 2026-09-01.
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.