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/cognitx-leyton/codegraph/plan_localgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cognitx-leyton/codegraphWhat 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 | $0.00007 | $0.04819 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.02410 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00964 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00482 |
Grade A, and why
plan_local 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 2d 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 — 546 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Implementation Plan Generator
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Objective
Transform the input into a battle-tested implementation plan through codebase exploration, research, and pattern extraction.
Core Principle: PLAN ONLY - no code written. Create a context-rich document that enables one-pass implementation.
Order: CODEBASE FIRST → REUSE INVENTORY → RESEARCH IF NEEDED → DESIGN → GENERATE.
Phase 1: PARSE
Determine Input Type
| Input | Action |
|---|---|
.prd.md file |
Read PRD, extract next pending phase |
Other .md file |
Read and extract feature description |
| Free-form text | Use directly as feature input |
| Blank | Use conversation context |
Extract Feature Understanding
- Problem: What are we solving?
- User Story: As a [user], I want to [action], so that [benefit]
- Type: NEW_CAPABILITY / ENHANCEMENT / REFACTOR / BUG_FIX
- Complexity: LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
Prior Plan Check
If other plans exist in .agents/plans/:
- Read their summaries to understand what infrastructure they create
- Note any shared files (e.g.,
ViewTypeSwitcher.tsxmodified by multiple plans) - Reference prior plans explicitly: "Depends on: {plan}.plan.md creating {component}"
- If a shared file will be modified by multiple plans, note the merge order
Phase 2: EXPLORE
Study the Codebase
Use the Explore agent to find:
- Similar implementations - analogous features with file:line references
- Naming conventions - actual examples from the codebase
- Error handling patterns - how errors are created and handled
- Type definitions - relevant interfaces and types
- Test patterns - test file structure and assertion styles
Document Patterns
| Category | File:Lines | Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| NAMING | path/to/file.ts:10-15 |
{pattern description} |
| ERRORS | path/to/file.ts:20-30 |
{pattern description} |
| TYPES | path/to/file.ts:1-10 |
{pattern description} |
| TESTS | path/to/test.ts:1-25 |
{pattern description} |
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 546 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 9035f7befbb5
plan_local is a command published in the GitHub repository cognitx-leyton/codegraph (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 4,819 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 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
feedback
Security Design Review — PRD/기획서 기반 보안 의견서·검토 의견서 생성.
compliance
이전 보안 진단 보고서의 Finding들이 패치되었는지 확인하고, 변경된 코드에서 신규 취약점을 탐색합니다.
va
Vulnerability Assessment — 8차원 아키텍처 진단 + Self-Verify + Evidence Verification.
pentest
Penetration Testing — 시나리오 기반 모의해킹 + POC + 라이브 검증 (State Delta 기반).
redteam
Red Team Operations — 인프라 설정 보안 리뷰 + MITRE ATT&CK + Detection Engineering.
run
CH015 CISO에게 보안 진단을 지시합니다. 자연어로 요청하면 적절한 Division과 에이전트를 자동 할당합니다.