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/drobins25/craft/craft-analyzegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/drobins25/craftWrote 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/drobins25/craft/craft-analyze)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/drobins25/craft/craft-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/drobins25/craft/craft-analyze.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00021 | $0.04537 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.02269 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00907 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00454 |
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 5d 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 — 562 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyze
Run comprehensive analysis on what you've built. Findings persist between sessions — nothing gets lost.
Analysis Types
| Type | Agent | Finds |
|---|---|---|
| QA | qa-analyzer | Bugs, errors, edge cases |
| UX | ux-analyzer | Friction, accessibility, heuristic violations |
| Creative | creative-analyzer | Delight opportunities, feature ideas |
| Style | style-analyzer | Token violations, pattern drift |
| Walkthrough | walkthrough-analyzer | "Does it actually work for a human?" - clicks everything, checks every state |
Flow
Step 1: Check Pending Findings
Before any new analysis, check for existing pending findings of the requested type.
If pending findings exist:
"You have [N] pending [type] findings from [date]:
Critical/High: [count] Medium: [count] Low: [count]
What would you like to do?"
Use AskUserQuestion:
question: "What would you like to do with pending findings?"
header: "Pending"
options:
- label: "Review pending findings now"
description: "Go through existing findings before new analysis"
- label: "Continue analysis (keep pending)"
description: "Run new analysis, existing findings stay queued"
- label: "Clear pending and start fresh"
description: "Dismiss old findings, start new analysis"
If user provides custom text: Ask a clarifying AskUserQuestion before proceeding.
If user chooses "Review pending" → Go to Step 5 (Review Findings)
If user chooses "Continue" or "Clear" → Proceed to Step 2
Step 2: Select Analysis Type
"What kind of analysis?"
Use AskUserQuestion:
question: "What kind of analysis?"
header: "Type"
options:
- label: "QA Pass"
description: "Find bugs and errors"
- label: "UX Insights"
description: "Usability and accessibility review"
- label: "Creative Exploration"
description: "Find delight opportunities"
- label: "Style Audit"
description: "Design consistency check"
- label: "Walkthrough"
description: "Click everything in the live app, report what doesn't feel right"
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 562 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 62a4dbb2596b
analyze is a command published in the GitHub repository drobins25/craft (53 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 4,537 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
claudehut-learning-report
Show the ClaudeHut learning scoreboard — measured memory health (store size, reinforcement, effectiveness/recurrence, quality) so you can tell whether the agent is actually getting smarter across sessions. One-shot, read-only.
orchestrate
This tool coordinates Claude Code's actions. It does NOT write code or create content.
project
Generate project documentation (product.md, structure.md, tech.md, codemaps/).
repo-architect
Repository structure optimization and multi-repo management with ruv-swarm coordination for scalable project architecture and development workflows.
analyst
Use when performing local analyst review before pushing PR changes. Assesses code quality, impact analysis, and maintainability.
performance-bottlenecks
Identify and resolve performance bottlenecks in your development workflow.