Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to davesheffer/hunch. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/davesheffer/hunch/main/.claude/commands/hunch-why.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/davesheffer/hunchWrote 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/davesheffer/hunch/hunch-why)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/davesheffer/hunch/hunch-why"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/davesheffer/hunch/hunch-why/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/davesheffer/hunch/hunch-why"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/davesheffer/hunch/hunch-why.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 | $0.00015 | $0.00140 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00056 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00028 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00014 |
Grade A, and why
hunch-why 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.
What it actually says
Use the hunch_why MCP tool on $ARGUMENTS (a file path or symbol name).
Then summarize, with citations:
- the decisions that shaped it (id + rationale),
- the constraints that must not break,
- the bug history behind it (root causes).
Cite record ids and their provenance/confidence. If Hunch returns nothing,
say so plainly and suggest running hunch index or hunch backfill.
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 · 15 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 39db8f4f5c1d
hunch-why is a command published in the GitHub repository davesheffer/hunch (11 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 140 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
audit-agents-skills
Audit quality of agents, skills, and commands in a Claude Code project.
review
Review the current diff against project memory.
advanced-code-review-context
Advanced Code Review Phase 2: Context Analysis - load previous reviews, PR history, declined items.
code-review-give
Give mode for code-review: Review someone else's code with multi-pass analysis and structured recommendations.
review-design-verify
Phases 4-5 of reviewing-design-docs: Interface Verification + Implementation Simulation.
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.