Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/main/.claude/commands/discussion-reply.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claudeWrote 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/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/discussion-reply)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/discussion-reply"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/discussion-reply/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/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/discussion-reply"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/discussion-reply.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00347 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00173 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00069 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00035 |
Grade A, and why
discussion-reply scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Generate a GitHub Discussion reply for a completed feature implementation.
Steps
- Run
git log -1 --format="%H"to get the latest commit hash - Write the reply to
discussion-$ARGUMENTS-reply.mdin the project root
Format
Implemented in [`{short_hash}`](https://github.com/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/commit/{full_hash}).
**{One-line summary of the new feature or change}**
{Code example if applicable, e.g. a JSON settings snippet in a fenced block}
- {Key detail: default behavior, backwards compatibility}
- {Key detail: validation, error handling}
- {Key detail: edge cases, fallbacks}
See [{Link text}]({URL to relevant docs section}) for details.
Rules
- Use the short hash (first 7 chars) for display, full hash in the URL
- Keep bullet points concise - highlight what users need to know, not implementation details
- The code example is optional - include it when the feature has user-facing configuration
- The docs link should point to the specific section, not the whole page (use
#anchor) - Write in English
- Tell the user the file is ready and can be deleted after copying
Input
$ARGUMENTS is the discussion number (e.g. 11). Read the discussion content using gh api repos/jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude/discussions/$ARGUMENTS --jq '.title, .body' to understand what was implemented, then compose the reply based on the actual changes in the latest commit.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 36 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 22a2d007756a
discussion-reply is a command published in the GitHub repository jens-duttke/usage-monitor-for-claude (282 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 347 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
notebook-review
Comprehensive review of Jupyter notebooks and Python scripts.
learn
Extract patterns and learnings from current session.
workflow-classify
Classify task size (S/M/L/XL) and recommend the appropriate workflow pipeline.
icpg-bootstrap
Infer ReasonNodes from existing git commit history. One-time setup for existing codebases.
statusbar-style
Switch the status-bar style (classic / capsule / hairline).
security-review
A security review procedure based on CWE, a list of common software weaknesses, and STRIDE, a method for identifying threats to a system.