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/jayminwest/kotadb/buggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jayminwest/kotadbWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.01324 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00662 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00265 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00132 |
Grade A, and why
bug 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- refactor — 86% identical, 104 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 121 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/bug
Template Category: Action
Author a remediation plan for the bug described in $ARGUMENTS (issue metadata JSON). The plan must equip the implementor to fix the defect with minimal churn.
CRITICAL - Worktree Path Handling:
- You are executing in an isolated git worktree directory
- Your CWD is the worktree root (e.g.,
/project/trees/bug-123-abc12345) - ALL file paths in Write, Edit, Read tools MUST be relative to CWD
- ✅ Correct:
.claude/.cache/specs/bug-123-plan.md - ❌ Wrong:
/project/trees/bug-123-abc12345/.claude/.cache/specs/bug-123-plan.md - Using absolute paths will cause git staging failures and commit errors
Instructions
- Verify issue labels first: Run
gh issue view <issue-number> --json labelsto ensure the issue has labels from all four categories (component, priority, effort, status). If labels are missing, apply them before proceeding. - Create a new markdown plan under
.claude/.cache/specs/namedbug-<issue-number>-<slug>.md(e.g.,.claude/.cache/specs/bug-2210-missing-search-results.md). - Build
<slug>from the issue title using 3–6 lowercase, hyphenated words (alphanumeric only). - Follow the format exactly so orchestrators can parse sections reliably.
- Use KotaDB MCP tools for discovery: Use
mcp__kotadb-staging__search_codeto find related error handling code,mcp__kotadb-staging__search_dependenciesfor impact assessment (see.claude/commands/docs/kotadb-agent-usage.mdfor patterns) - Reproduce the bug mentally using the provided context and outline how to confirm both failure and resolution.
- Investigate impacted modules in
src/**,tests/**, and any infrastructure noted in the issue before proposing changes. - Capture all impacted files (and any new assets) in the dedicated section so implementors have clear scope boundaries.
- Reference the repo git flow: work from
bug/<issue-number>-<slug>offdevelop, withdeveloppromoted tomainon release. - Integrate
/anti-mockexpectations: propose real database test coverage, failure injection, and follow-ups for any temporary skips. - Ensure the plan's closing tasks rerun validation and push the branch so a PR can be raised (PR titles must end with the issue number, e.g.
fix: correct row filters (#210)). - Consult
.claude/commands/docs/conditional_docs/app.mdor.claude/commands/docs/conditional_docs/automation.mdand read only the documentation whose conditions align with the defect. - When the remediation introduces new documentation, add or update the relevant conditional entry so future agents can discover it quickly.
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 · 121 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 6391538e6ebb
bug is a command published in the GitHub repository jayminwest/kotadb (102 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,324 tokens. 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
design-review
Workflow recipe — review a design end-to-end, ending in measured numbers rather than adjectives, by chaining 4 skills.
setup-pm-skills
Onboard a new user — find out what they do, recommend the right bundles & top skills, and set up a project CONTEXT.md so every skill is tailored to them.
statusbar-style
Switch the status-bar style (classic / capsule / hairline).
validate-dependencies
Validate all task dependencies for issues.
fest-show
Show festival progression (in-progress tasks, roadmap, and dependency view).
superpowers-execute
Execute the current GSD phase plan with Superpowers instead of gsd-execute-phase.