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/emasoft/claude-plugins-validation/cpv-batch-caching-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Emasoft/claude-plugins-validationWrote 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/emasoft/claude-plugins-validation/cpv-batch-caching-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/emasoft/claude-plugins-validation/cpv-batch-caching-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/emasoft/claude-plugins-validation/cpv-batch-caching-audit.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 | $0.00107 | $0.01506 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.00753 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00301 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00151 |
Grade A, and why
cpv-batch-caching-audit 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 4d 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 — 162 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/cpv-batch-caching-audit — Read-only cache audit across many plugins
The cpv-cache-optimizer-agent's full workflow (audit → fix → re-validate
→ optional Phase-4 broader refactor) is expensive — each Phase-4 step
requires interactive confirmation. For a fleet-wide "which plugins
have cache-invalidation findings?" snapshot, this command runs only
Phase 1 (audit) per plugin and returns the per-plugin severity
table. Apply fixes later with /cpv-batch-caching-optimize.
Same input grammar as the rest of the batch family — single plugin
local/URL, marketplace local/URL, list, @listfile, or
comma-separated.
You are the orchestrator
You — the model running THIS turn — drive the batch from the main session. You do NOT audit anything yourself.
Step 0 — Resolve arguments
If no target was given, ask plain-text:
Which marketplace, plugin, or list should I cache-audit? Provide a path, URL, or @listfile.
Step 1 — Build the batch plan
BATCH_SPEC="$1"
MAX_PARALLEL=8
python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/cpv_batch_orchestrator.py" plan \
"$BATCH_SPEC" \
--agent cpv-cache-optimizer-agent \
--mode batch_audit \
--max-parallel "$MAX_PARALLEL"
Capture the orchestrator's stdout (PLAN, STATUS_TABLE,
SESSION_DIR, PLUGIN_COUNT, DISPATCH_GROUPS). Queue the
initial status table for the claude-menu-system Stop hook (emitted
post-turn via systemMessage — zero token cost, NEVER printed
inline by the orchestrator):
python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/print_menu.py" "$STATUS_TABLE"
NEVER print menu inline; the CMS Stop hook emits via systemMessage at turn end.
Step 2 — Dispatch audit agents in parallel
for plugin_index in group:
plugin = plan.plugins[plugin_index]
Agent(
subagent_type: "cpv-cache-optimizer-agent",
description: "Batch-cache-audit {plugin.display_name}",
prompt: |
<context>
source: /cpv-batch-caching-audit
mode: batch_audit
plugin_index: {plugin.plugin_index}
plugin_path: {plugin.abs_path}
source_url: {plugin.source_url or "—"}
display_name: {plugin.display_name}
session_dir: {plan.session_dir}
status_path: {plan.session_dir}/plugin-{plugin.plugin_index}.status.json
</context>
Run Phase 1 (Audit) of your standard cache workflow ONLY —
skip Phase 2 (Fix), Phase 3 (Re-validate), and Phase 4
(Broader refactor). Write per-plugin status JSON to
`status_path` with the canonical batch_audit schema (see
agents/cpv-cache-optimizer-agent.md). Audit-only, so set `after`
equal to `before`:
{
"status_symbol": "✓" | "✗" | "⚠",
"status_label": "clean" | "findings" | "warning-only",
"before": {"critical": N, "major": N, "minor": N, "nit": N, "warning": N},
"after": {"critical": N, "major": N, "minor": N, "nit": N, "warning": N},
"report_path": "<abs-path-to-cache-audit-report>",
"notes": "<short summary, e.g. 0 CA-01, 2 CA-04>"
}
Return ONE line exactly:
[plugin-{plugin.plugin_index}] {label}: <C>/<M>/<m>/<n>/<w> (status: {status_path})
Do NOT render menus. Do NOT apply fixes. Do NOT ask the user
whether to proceed — this is read-only audit mode.
run_in_background: false
)
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 162 lines · 107 tokens per session scan A 16796c5c5d52
cpv-batch-caching-audit is a command published in the GitHub repository Emasoft/claude-plugins-validation (4 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 107 tokens to every session and 1,506 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.