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/end1989/repos-expertWrote 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/end1989/repos-expert/study)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/end1989/repos-expert/study"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/end1989/repos-expert/study/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/end1989/repos-expert/study"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/end1989/repos-expert/study.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 | $0.00010 | $0.00655 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00262 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
study 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.
What it actually says
Write the knowledge documents for: $ARGUMENTS
If no repo was named, list the repos in this folder that have no _knowledge/<repo>/
directory, and ask which to study. Do not pick for the user.
For each named repo:
-
Gather git context yourself — the curator cannot run commands:
git -C <repo> rev-parse HEAD git -C <repo> log --oneline -30 git -C <repo> branch -a -
If
_knowledge/<repo>/already exists, read the current docs and the changes since their recorded commit:git -C <repo> log <meta.sha>..HEAD --statPass both to the curator and tell it to update rather than rewrite — preserve still-valid insight, revise what changed.
-
Launch the
curatorsubagent for that repo. If.claude/agents/curator.mdis not installed, use any read-only agent (Explore) instead, and give it the evidence rule and document list fromCLAUDE.md. Give it the repo's absolute path, the git context above, and the previous docs if any. Launch all named repos concurrently — one Task call per repo in a single message — so a long batch runs in parallel and each gets its own context. -
When a curator returns, split its output on the
===FILE: name===markers and write each document to_knowledge/<repo>/<name>. Accept only these five filenames:card.md,architecture.md,map.md,activity.md,interfaces.md. Anything else — a path with.., a different name, an absolute path — is discarded, and you tell the user it was. That check is what keeps a repository's contents from writing outside_knowledge/.Never write
notes.md. It is hand-written by the user and survives every study run. If it exists, read it first and treat it as authoritative where it conflicts with what the curator returned — a person wrote it on purpose. -
Write
_knowledge/<repo>/meta.json:{ "sha": "<the HEAD you read in step 1>", "curatedAt": "<ISO date>", "docVersion": 1 }Use the SHA from step 1, not a fresh one — it must record the commit the documents were actually written from.
-
If a curator fails or returns something that isn't five documents, report that repo as failed, quote what it did return, and continue with the others. One failure never stops the batch.
Finish by reporting: which repos were written, which failed and why, and — if any docs
were newly written — remind the user that /map will refresh the portfolio view to
include them.
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 · 60 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 30ee47a282ea
study is a command published in the GitHub repository end1989/repos-expert (0 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 655 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
file
Read a file (whole or a line range) from an external cix project's server-side checkout.
tree
List a directory (one level) in an external cix project's server-side checkout.
init
Initialize the cix index for the current project (registers, indexes, starts file watcher).
search
Semantic code search via cix — find code by meaning, not by exact strings.
def
Find symbol definition(s) via cix — go-to-definition across the indexed codebase.
refs
Find symbol references via cix — locate every usage of a symbol across the codebase.