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/ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-pluginsWrote 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/ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-plugins/analyze-issue)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-plugins/analyze-issue"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-plugins/analyze-issue/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/ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-plugins/analyze-issue"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-plugins/analyze-issue.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00205 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00082 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00041 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00020 |
Grade A, and why
analyze-issue 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.
Copies of this mod
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- analyze-issue — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- analyze-issue — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
What it actually says
GitHub Issue Analysis and Technical Specification Generator
This template/script generates a technical specification for a GitHub issue with the following components:
Key Components
- A bash script to fetch GitHub issue details
- A structured technical specification template with sections:
- Issue Summary
- Problem Statement
- Technical Approach
- Implementation Plan
- Test Plan
- Files to Modify/Create
- Success Criteria
- Out of Scope
Principles
- Test-Driven Development (TDD)
- KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) approach
- 300-line file size limit
The template is designed to provide a comprehensive, structured approach to analyzing and documenting technical issues from GitHub.
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 · 29 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 42183c07cad2
analyze-issue is a command published in the GitHub repository ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-plugins (974 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 205 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
create-pull-request
Provides comprehensive PR creation guidance with GitHub CLI, enforcing title conventions, following template structure, and offering concrete command examples with best practices.
pr-issue-resolve
Follow these steps to analyze suggested changes (e.g., review comments, inline suggestions, or requested modifications) in a GitHub Pull Request (PR) and resolve them efficiently. The goal is to review, understand, plan fixes, apply changes, test, and update the PR while maintaining code quality and collaboration.
github-issue-fix
This is a detailed way you can analyze the GitHub issues and let Claude handle them in best possible way.
create-pr
Streamlines pull request creation by handling the entire workflow: creating a new branch, committing changes, formatting modified files with Biome, and submitting the PR.
create-worktrees
Creates git worktrees for all open PRs or specific branches, handling branches with slashes, cleaning up stale worktrees, and supporting custom branch creation for development.
husky
Sets up and manages Husky Git hooks by configuring pre-commit hooks, establishing commit message standards, integrating with linting tools, and ensuring code quality on commits.