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/ddunnock/claude-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/ddunnock/claude-plugins/analyze)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ddunnock/claude-plugins/analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ddunnock/claude-plugins/analyze/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/ddunnock/claude-plugins/analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ddunnock/claude-plugins/analyze.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 | $0.00012 | $0.01043 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00417 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00209 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
analyze 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md before implementation.
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
You MUST consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
Goal
Identify inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items across the three core artifacts before implementation. This is a pre-implementation quality gate.
Operating Constraints
STRICTLY READ-ONLY: Do not modify any files. Output a structured analysis report.
Directive Authority: The project directives in .claude/memory/ are non-negotiable. Directive conflicts are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the spec, plan, or tasks.
Memory Directives
Load these directive files for compliance checking:
Always loaded:
constitution.md- Global principles, quality gatessecurity.md- Security requirementstesting.md- Test coverage requirements (80% minimum)documentation.md- Documentation standards
Project-specific (detected: Python ≥3.11, Poetry, MCP SDK):
python.md- Python standards, Pyright strict, ruff, Google-style docstringsgit-cicd.md- Conventional commits, CI pipeline
Artifacts to Analyze
| Artifact | Source |
|---|---|
| spec.md | speckit/spec.md |
| plan.md | speckit/plan.md |
| tasks.md | speckit/*-tasks.md |
Detection Passes
A. Duplication Detection
- Identify near-duplicate requirements
- Mark lower-quality phrasing for consolidation
B. Ambiguity Detection
- Flag vague adjectives (fast, scalable, secure) lacking measurable criteria
- Flag unresolved placeholders (TODO, TKTK, ???,
<placeholder>)
C. Underspecification
- Requirements with verbs but missing measurable outcome
- User stories missing acceptance criteria
- Tasks referencing undefined components
D. Directive Alignment (Agent)
Invoke compliance-checker agent:
subagent_type: "speckit-generator:compliance-checker"
prompt: "Check compliance of speckit/*.md against .claude/memory/constitution.md and all tech-specific memory files"
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 · 178 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A bc509ff95b11
analyze is a command published in the GitHub repository ddunnock/claude-plugins (14 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 1,043 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.