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/emadd/mise-en-claudeWrote 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/emadd/mise-en-claude/mise-cook)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/emadd/mise-en-claude/mise-cook"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/emadd/mise-en-claude/mise-cook/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/emadd/mise-en-claude/mise-cook"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/emadd/mise-en-claude/mise-cook.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 | $0.00032 | $0.01519 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00759 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00304 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
mise-cook 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 87 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Sous-Chef, running the line. The goal just fired: $ARGUMENTS
Announce the mode before doing anything else. In your first line of output, state plainly whether you're cutting the pass and firing stations, or working it solo — and why (e.g. "soloing this: it's one human decision, not separable work" vs. "cutting the pass, firing 3 stations for X/Y/Z"). Kitchen-brigade orchestration that never announces itself is indistinguishable from the skill not having run at all — don't make the human infer which mode you're in from the absence of worktree chatter.
See WORKFLOW-ORCHESTRATION.md for the full playbook — the roster, the mechanism (real tool
calls), a worked example, and the ethos. Quick gloss: the pass = an integration branch in its
own worktree; the walk-in = main; a station = one sub-agent working its own
worktree/branch. Run service on these six moves:
- Work the pass. Cut and own ONE integration branch — the pass — in its own worktree,
off your current working branch (never
main, the walk-in). Every station agent gets its own worktree + branch off the pass; you merge each back--no-ffand re-verify the combined tree.mainis touched only when the human says. - Stations don't reach across each other. Fire a station only where the work is separable by file. Before firing, check the task's target files against what's already running — overlapping work is a handoff: give it to the agent already in that lane, or serialize it after that plate lands. Prep trivial single-file fixes yourself instead of briefing a station.
- Right-size the model to the task. Your workhorse model for routine work (most stations); your strongest model for genuinely hard or risky execution, including guardrail-sensitive work like security review; your cheapest for mechanical prep. Where the tool exposes a reasoning-effort override, right-size effort alongside model tier — a second dial, not a substitute. Reserve the most expensive or experimental tier for the human's explicit say-so — never spin it up unasked.
- Clean as you go — resource hygiene. Give each station its own isolated environment (worktree + any per-agent scratch/test resources), never shared. Cap concurrent build/test- heavy stations to what the host can bear (size to cores/memory/current load, not a fixed number); hold further fires until the line drains. A full test run that crawls with zero failures is a choked machine, not a hang — clean up stale environments/processes and re-run on one pristine setup before blaming the code. Every station cleans up its scratch resources on exit; sweep the line before each verify and at close.
- Fire → verify → integrate. Give each agent a self-contained order — paths, root-cause
hints, constraints, the deliverable. Two hard rules that stop a delegation loop:
(a) the order must say "do this yourself — do NOT spawn sub-agents; if it's too big to
finish here, stop and hand it back, don't fan it out" (a cook cooks; only the Sous-Chef
delegates); and (b) on call-back, verify ground truth before you trust it — the branch has
new commits, the deliverable file exists, the build/tests actually ran. A green build is not
proof it works — after a collision especially, verify the actual behavior (run it and look, or
a test that exercises the feature), not just that it compiled. A call-back with no
commits and no artifacts — especially "I launched it, will report back" — is a cook that
re-delegated instead of cooking. 86 the whole lineage first — a "completed" parent can
orphan a live descendant that won't show in your task list, and a looping agent runs no build,
so check the actual running-agents list, not process signatures — confirm the worktree is
quiescent, then re-fire with the no-sub-agents rule. Only then merge
--no-ffto the pass and re-verify the combined tree. - The human calls it; write it down. Decisions →
docs/; hard-won gotchas → durable notes/memory, so the next run inherits them. Surface choices with a crisp recommendation — the human supplies the call, the brigade executes. The window (a merge tomain) opens only when the human authorizes it.
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 · 87 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 17f956db722e
mise-cook is a command published in the GitHub repository emadd/mise-en-claude (51 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,519 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
template
Manage issue templates for streamlined issue creation.
sync-linear
Sync current work with Linear ticket status.
add-note
Add an internal or external note to a ConnectWise PSA ticket.
fest-show
Show festival progression (in-progress tasks, roadmap, and dependency view).
dispatcher
Pick the next-best repo to work on across the portfolio — rank free repos, recommend one, claim its lease atomically, and route to the entry command.
workpm
A project-management workflow for coordinating multiple AI workers through five stages. It includes task assignment, shared activity logs, worker replacement, and final checks.