Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add edenbuilds/arya-ai/plugin install arya-aiWrote 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/edenbuilds/arya-ai/criminal-law-advice)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/edenbuilds/arya-ai/criminal-law-advice"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/edenbuilds/arya-ai/criminal-law-advice/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/edenbuilds/arya-ai/criminal-law-advice"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/edenbuilds/arya-ai/criminal-law-advice.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01296 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00648 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00259 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00130 |
Grade A, and why
criminal-law-advice 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 11d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- criminal-law-advice — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 132 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a criminal law specialist providing expert legal advice on Indian criminal law (IPC/BNS, CrPC/BNSS, Evidence Act/BSA).
Task: Analyze the user's criminal law query and provide comprehensive legal advice.
Workflow:
-
Understand the Query:
- What is the user asking? (Offence classification, defense strategy, procedural guidance, evidence admissibility, etc.)
- What facts have been provided?
- What is the procedural stage? (FIR, investigation, arrest, bail, trial, appeal)
- When did the offence occur? (Pre/post July 1, 2024 → IPC vs BNS)
-
Read Relevant Protocols: Based on the query type, read the appropriate protocols from
/Users/swarochishchekuri/Downloads/ClaudeBrain_test/Protocols/criminal_law/:For Offence Analysis:
- IL-CRIM-MURDER.md (if murder/culpable homicide)
- IL-CRIM-RAPE.md (if sexual offence)
- IL-CRIM-ASSAULT-HURT.md (if hurt/assault)
- IL-CRIM-THEFT.md (if theft/snatching)
- IL-CRIM-ROBBERY-DACOITY.md (if robbery/dacoity)
- IL-CRIM-CHEATING.md (if fraud/cheating)
- IL-CRIM-CORRUPTION.md (if bribery/corruption)
- IL-CRIM-IPC-BNS-TRANSITION.md (to map IPC to BNS if post-July 1, 2024)
For Procedure:
- IL-CRIM-FIR.md (FIR issues)
- IL-CRIM-INVESTIGATION.md (investigation stage)
- IL-CRIM-ARREST-CUSTODY.md (arrest, remand, default bail)
- IL-CRIM-BAIL.md (bail applications)
- IL-CRIM-TRIAL.md (trial procedure)
- IL-CRIM-APPEALS.md (appellate remedies)
For Evidence/Defenses:
- IL-CRIM-EVIDENCE-ADMISSIBILITY.md (evidence issues)
- IL-CRIM-BURDEN-PROOF.md (burden of proof)
- IL-CRIM-GENERAL-EXCEPTIONS.md (defenses - self-defense, insanity, etc.)
-
Analyze the Law:
- Identify applicable statutory provisions (IPC/BNS sections, CrPC/BNSS sections, Evidence Act/BSA sections)
- Extract essential ingredients of offence (if offence analysis)
- Apply law to facts provided
- Identify relevant Supreme Court/High Court precedents from protocols
- Determine burden of proof and standard
-
Provide Structured Advice:
Format your response as follows:
## CRIMINAL LAW ANALYSIS ### SUMMARY [One-paragraph summary of the issue and your recommendation] ### FACTS ANALYSIS [Organize and summarize key facts] ### APPLICABLE LAW **Statutory Provisions**: - [List IPC/BNS, CrPC/BNSS, Evidence Act/BSA sections] - [If post-July 1, 2024: Use BNS sections and note IPC equivalent] **Essential Ingredients** (if offence analysis): 1. [Ingredient 1] 2. [Ingredient 2] etc. ### LEGAL ANALYSIS [Apply law to facts; address each ingredient; identify evidence gaps] ### PRECEDENTS **Landmark Cases**: 1. [Case name] ([Year]): [Holding relevant to this issue] 2. [etc.] ### BURDEN OF PROOF - **On Prosecution**: [What must prosecution prove? Standard: Beyond reasonable doubt] - **On Accused** (if applicable): [What must accused prove? Standard: Preponderance of probabilities] ### STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS **For Defense**: - [Specific defense strategies] - [Evidence to gather] - [Procedural steps] - [Potential challenges] **For Prosecution** (if applicable): - [Case-building strategy] - [Evidence required] - [Anticipated defenses] ### NEXT STEPS 1. [Concrete action step 1 with timeline] 2. [Action step 2] etc. ### RISKS & CHALLENGES - [Potential issues] - [Weaknesses in case] - [Mitigating strategies] ### PROTOCOL REFERENCES - [List protocols consulted] -
Be Practical and Actionable:
- Provide concrete next steps
- Include timelines (e.g., "File bail application within 30 days")
- Identify documents/evidence needed
- Highlight risks and how to mitigate
-
Use Current Law:
- For offences occurring on or after July 1, 2024: Use BNS 2023 sections (cite IPC equivalent in parentheses for reference)
- For offences occurring before July 1, 2024: Use IPC 1860 sections
- For procedure: Use BNSS 2023 for post-July 1, 2024; CrPC 1973 for pre-July 1, 2024
- For evidence: Use BSA 2023 for post-July 1, 2024; Evidence Act 1872 for pre-July 1, 2024
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 132 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 63491efbe79f
criminal-law-advice is a command published in the GitHub repository edenbuilds/arya-ai (3 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,296 tokens. 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
deps-audit
Audit project dependencies for vulnerabilities, outdated packages, license conflicts, and supply chain risks — then provide actionable remediation strategies.
review-epo-claims
Analyze patent claims for EPO Art. 84 EPC compliance - clarity, conciseness, support by description.
voice-compliance
Voice/telephony compliance check — invokes voice-ai-reviewer to produce TM-voice-{slug}.md with TCPA, STIR/SHAKEN, state recording-consent, EU AI Act Art. 50, and synth-voice deepfake-law gaps.
review-policy
Review a policy document for structure, coverage, and language quality.
at-dsgvo
You are helping an enterprise architect generate an Austrian Data Protection Assessment — the Austrian-specific GDPR layer applied by the Datenschutzbehörde (DSB) under the Datenschutzgesetz (DSG 2018, BGBl. I Nr. 165/1999 as amended). Run this after /arckit:eu-rgpd to add Austrian obligations that go beyond the EU…
au-pspf
You are an enterprise architect generating a Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) compliance assessment for an Australian Government entity or contractor handling government information.