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/fergupa/claude_plugins/respondgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fergupa/claude_pluginsWhat 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 | $0.00011 | $0.01449 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00724 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00290 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00145 |
Grade A, and why
respond 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 2d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to respond — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 198 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/respond -- Generate Response from Templates
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Generate a response to a common legal inquiry using configured templates. Customizes the response with specific details and includes escalation triggers for situations that should not use a templated response.
Important: This command assists with legal workflows but does not provide legal advice. Generated responses should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals before being sent.
Invocation
/respond [inquiry-type]
Common inquiry types:
dsrordata-subject-request-- Data subject access/deletion/correction requestsholdordiscovery-hold-- Litigation hold noticesvendororvendor-question-- Vendor legal questionsndaornda-request-- NDA requests from business teamsprivacyorprivacy-inquiry-- Privacy-related questionssubpoena-- Subpoena or legal process responsesinsurance-- Insurance claim notificationscustom-- Use a custom template
If no inquiry type is provided, ask the user what type of response they need and show available categories.
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Inquiry Type
Accept the inquiry type from the user. If the type is ambiguous, show available categories and ask for clarification.
Step 2: Load Template
Look for templates in local settings (e.g., legal.local.md or a templates directory).
If templates are configured:
- Load the appropriate template for the inquiry type
- Identify required variables (recipient name, dates, specific details)
If no templates are configured:
- Inform the user that no templates were found for this inquiry type
- Offer to help create a template (see Step 6)
- Provide a reasonable default response structure based on the inquiry type
Step 3: Check Escalation Triggers
Before generating the response, evaluate whether this situation has characteristics that should NOT use a templated response:
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 198 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 319c785cdee1
respond is a command published in the GitHub repository fergupa/claude_plugins (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 1,449 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to respond, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-epo-claims
Analyze patent claims for EPO Art. 84 EPC compliance - clarity, conciseness, support by description.
review-policy
Review a policy document for structure, coverage, and language quality.
au-soci-cirmp
You are an enterprise architect generating a Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (SOCI Act) / Critical Infrastructure Risk Management Program (CIRMP) governance and evidence pack for an Australian critical infrastructure asset or potentially regulated entity.
au-aescsf
You are an enterprise architect generating an Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) maturity assessment for an Australian energy-sector project, asset, market interface, OT environment, DER platform, or regulated energy business capability.
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.
compliance-audit
Full regulatory compliance audit for GDPR, HIPAA, SOC2, PCI-DSS, ISO 27001, and other frameworks with gap analysis, remediation planning, and evidence collection.