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/hudrazine/claude-code-memory-bank/understandgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hudrazine/claude-code-memory-bankWrote 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/hudrazine/claude-code-memory-bank/understand)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hudrazine/claude-code-memory-bank/understand"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hudrazine/claude-code-memory-bank/understand.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 | $0.00007 | $0.00722 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00361 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
understand 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Context Review & Initial Assessment
Memory Bank Context
- @memory-bank/projectbrief.md
- @memory-bank/productContext.md
- @memory-bank/systemPatterns.md
- @memory-bank/techContext.md
- @memory-bank/activeContext.md
- @memory-bank/progress.md
Task
Think through the task requirements and current project context to establish comprehensive understanding.
$ARGUMENTS
Process
1. Task Decomposition
- Break down the task into core requirements
- Identify explicit and implicit constraints
- Clarify the scope and expected outcomes
- Note any assumptions that need validation
2. Context Discovery
Leverage parallel tool execution for efficient information gathering:
- Use Task agent for broad pattern searches when exploring unknown areas
- Apply Grep/Glob for specific file and content location
- Read relevant files, configurations, and documentation
- Check recent git history if understanding evolution helps
3. Initial Analysis
Based on gathered information:
- Map current system state and relevant components
- Identify dependencies and integration points
- Recognize existing patterns that should be followed
- Spot potential challenges or contradictions
4. Knowledge Synthesis
- Connect findings to existing project documentation
- Relate to established project patterns and conventions
- Consider technical constraints and architecture decisions
- Review current project context and focus areas
5. Feedback Loop Analysis (When returning from other phases)
When revisiting due to implementation feedback:
- From
/workflow:execute: Focus on specific blockers or discoveries- Review the documented issues from implementation
- Investigate root causes of integration problems
- Clarify ambiguous requirements based on real constraints
- From
/workflow:plan: Re-examine assumptions that proved incorrect- Validate new constraints discovered during planning
- Research alternative approaches for blocked strategies
- Efficiency tip: Target investigation to specific feedback rather than full re-analysis
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 · 108 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A a07850f1254a
understand is a command published in the GitHub repository hudrazine/claude-code-memory-bank (41 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed Unlicense. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 722 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
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.