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/CNaught-Inc/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/cnaught-inc/claude-code-plugins/eco-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cnaught-inc/claude-code-plugins/eco-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cnaught-inc/claude-code-plugins/eco-review/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/cnaught-inc/claude-code-plugins/eco-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cnaught-inc/claude-code-plugins/eco-review.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 | $0.00008 | $0.00059 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00024 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00012 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00006 |
Grade A, and why
eco-review 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 2mo 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
Invoke the carbonlog:eco-review skill and follow it exactly as presented to you.
Scan the current project codebase and produce a sustainability review report with ranked, cited recommendations.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 9 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A d3fe8d573b40
eco-review is a command published in the GitHub repository CNaught-Inc/claude-code-plugins (6 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 59 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-31.
eco-review compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| eco-reviewCNaught-Inc/claude-code-plugins | Command | 6 | 7mo ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 8 | Claude Code |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | today | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | today | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | today | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | today | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |
| convergegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | today | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| implementgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | today | MIT | A | 14 | Claude Code |