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/CBirkbeck/mathlib-qualityWrote 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/cbirkbeck/mathlib-quality/develop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cbirkbeck/mathlib-quality/develop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cbirkbeck/mathlib-quality/develop/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/cbirkbeck/mathlib-quality/develop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cbirkbeck/mathlib-quality/develop.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 | $0.00173 | $0.19305 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00069 | $0.07722 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.03861 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.01930 |
Grade A, and why
develop 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 — 1,620 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/develop — Mathematical Development Planner
Plan a mathematical development. Creates a comprehensive plan from your references, designs the API for every new declaration, drafts the proof sketches step-by-step, and writes a detailed ticket board where every ticket contains the Lean statement and the full proof sketch with cited sources — detailed enough that no replanning is needed once execution starts.
/develop is planning-only. Workers don't run here. Once the ticket board is
approved, invoke /beastmode to pick up the next available ticket and work it to
completion.
This split keeps strategic thinking (mathlib search, API design, proof sketching from
sources, generality decisions) in /develop and tactical execution (state declaration,
call planned lemmas, iterate to compilation) in /beastmode. It prevents the
"agent reconsiders the whole approach mid-proof" failure mode — once /beastmode
starts a ticket, the plan is fixed; the worker either implements it or hard-stops with
a concrete reason it can't.
Source-faithfulness (BINDING — read before planning anything)
The single most expensive failure this command exists to prevent is a decomposition that drifts from the source's actual proof. When the plan's leaves are invented — chosen because they "look provable in Lean" or "connect to code we already have" rather than transcribed from the reference's own argument — the tree reliably bottoms out at a lemma the source never proves. That lemma is then either substantial mathlib-lacking infrastructure or outright false, and a worker burns a long session discovering it the hard way. Every recurrence has the same root cause: leaving the source.
The discipline that prevents it (enforced in Phase 1e and --decompose):
- Transcribe, don't invent. Read the reference's full proof (1e Step 1) and mirror its proposition chain. The source already did the decomposition; your leaves are its sub-results, named by their mathematical content — not a fresh route you happen to find convenient.
- Every leaf carries a precise source locator — statement number + page + a line/locator into
the reference text (e.g.
wedhorn.txt:2682). A leaf with no locator is suspect by default. - Acceptance test — quote-or-delete. For every leaf you must be able to quote, verbatim, the source passage that justifies it. If you cannot, it is an artifact: do not ticket it — go back to the source and find its real route.
- Two red flags that you have left the source — STOP and re-read the proof:
- the step needs you to build substantial infrastructure absent from mathlib, or
- a leaf turns out false (or only true under an extra hypothesis the source never uses). Both almost always mean the source proves the result a different, easier way.
- Never use memory or a prior summary as the source of a statement or a route. They drift
from both the reference and the code. Re-open the reference and the
.leanevery time.
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 · 1,620 lines · 173 tokens per session scan A 0d45a4277f85
develop is a command published in the GitHub repository CBirkbeck/mathlib-quality (35 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 173 tokens to every session and 19,305 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
verify-math
Verify a self-authored mathematical result end to end by routing claims across adversarial review, numerical falsification, symbolic or CAS checks, and Lean, then aggregating one report. Use when a theorem, proposition, conjecture, or paper-wide mathematical argument needs the appropriate combination of verification…
diff
Quantitative volume comparison between a CadQuery model and a reference STEP file.
simulation-calibrator
Test and refine simulation accuracy with validation loops, bias detection, and continuous improvement frameworks.
arg-diagram
ARG academic-paper diagram mode — standalone structural & conceptual diagram generation.
plot
Publication Polish. Runs after results-analysis (Phase 7). Audits all tables and figures produced in Phases 4–7, upgrades them to top-journal standards by calling the table and figure skills.
graphite-morphology-classify
Classify graphite in a cast-iron micrograph per ASTM A247 / ISO 945-1, quantify nodularity, and read the matrix — the single most diagnostic observation in a cast-iron case.