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/cicababba/claude-plugins-marketplaceWrote 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/cicababba/claude-plugins-marketplace/quality-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cicababba/claude-plugins-marketplace/quality-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cicababba/claude-plugins-marketplace/quality-check/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/cicababba/claude-plugins-marketplace/quality-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cicababba/claude-plugins-marketplace/quality-check.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00835 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00417 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
quality-check 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 9d 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 — 127 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/quality-check — Code Quality Report
Generate a comprehensive code quality analysis report without modifying any files.
ABSOLUTE SCOPE & RESTRICTIONS
- This command is read-only — it never modifies source code
- It generates a Markdown report under
.claude/dev-sessions/quality-reports/ - It does NOT depend on or update any active session
- It does NOT change any session Status
1. Gather Analysis Scope
Skill: Delegate to
dev-quality-report
Ask the user which paths to analyze:
- Default: repository root
- Accept specific paths (e.g.,
src/components,lib/utils) - Accept options:
--include "<glob1,glob2,...>"to restrict scope--exclude "<glob1,glob2,...>"to add ignore rules--default-excludes=falseto disable default ignores (discouraged)
2. Run Quality Analysis
Skill: Use
dev-quality-reportskill
Invoke dev-quality-report with:
- Paths to analyze
- Include/exclude options
- Default excludes preference
The skill will:
- Apply default ignore rules (node_modules, .git, dist, etc.)
- Generate unique report ID and path
- Write initial report with
Status: PENDING - Call
code-quality-analyzeragent (read-only) - Write final report with analysis and
Status: DONE
3. Report Output
The skill generates a report at:
.claude/dev-sessions/quality-reports/YYYYMMDD-HHmm-qa-<reportId>.md
Report includes:
- Repository Overview: Root, branch, detected tools, analyzed scope
- Executive Summary: Overall quality assessment
- Critical Issues: High-priority problems requiring immediate attention
- Issue Categories:
- Type Safety
- Linting
- Style Consistency
- Code Complexity
- Dead Code
- Dependency Risks
- File-Level Details: Specific locations with line numbers
- Actionable Recommendations: Concrete steps to fix issues
- Improvement Suggestions: Broader quality enhancement ideas
- Metrics: Files scanned, issue counts, severity breakdown
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 127 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A da555f7197c1
quality-check is a command published in the GitHub repository cicababba/claude-plugins-marketplace (3 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 835 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.