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/jonase47/ccprWrote 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/jonase47/ccpr/p8-business)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jonase47/ccpr/p8-business"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jonase47/ccpr/p8-business.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 5.1 | $0.00000 | $0.01513 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00757 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00303 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00151 |
Grade A, and why
p8-business 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 today.
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 — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/p8-business – Evaluate KPIs & Optimise Business Model
Evaluates the KPIs from ongoing operations, compares them with the plans from FINANCIAL_PLAN.md, and derives optimisation measures for the business model. Called regularly (recommended: monthly) or on an ad-hoc basis.
Argument: $ARGUMENTS = [KPI/metric or period, e.g. "MRR", "Churn", "last month", "Q1"]
If provided: Focus the evaluation on the specified metric or period. If not provided: Read GTM_LAUNCH.md and FINANCIAL_PLAN.md and perform a complete KPI evaluation for the current month. If any context is missing, ask about the evaluation period.
Execution
1. Read Context
Read the following files (if available):
- GTM_LAUNCH.md (defined KPIs and target values for 30/60/90 days)
- FINANCIAL_PLAN.md (revenue forecast and break-even as comparison basis)
- BUSINESS_MODEL.md (business model – which levers can be optimised?)
- Previous KPI reports (if available, for trend analysis)
2. Delegation to Business Analyst Agent (Lead)
Delegate KPI evaluation to the business-analyst agent:
Evaluate the KPIs for: $ARGUMENTS Target values from GTM_LAUNCH.md: [Apply KPI targets] Financial plan from FINANCIAL_PLAN.md: [Apply revenue forecast, break-even]
A. KPI Evaluation Create a clear KPI table:
KPI Target Actual Deviation Trend MRR X€ Y€ +/- Z% ↑/↓/→ New users (month) X Y Conversion rate X% Y% Churn rate X% Y% Break-even progress X% Y% B. Root Cause Analysis for Deviations For every significant negative deviation (> 20% below target):
- What are the probable causes?
- Is the deviation structural (the model is wrong) or temporary (seasonal effect, one-off event)?
- What data would be needed to confirm the cause?
C. Business Model Optimisation Evaluate current optimisation levers:
- Pricing: Are adjustments upward or downward warranted? Are there indications of price sensitivity?
- Acquisition channels: Which channel delivers the best results (CAC vs. LTV)?
- Retention: Where are we losing users? Are there patterns in churn?
- Upsell/Expansion: Is there growth potential with existing customers?
- Operating Costs: Are there cost positions that have grown disproportionately?
D. Financial Plan Update
- Does FINANCIAL_PLAN.md need to be adjusted based on actual numbers?
- Has the projected break-even shifted?
- How much capital runway remains?
E. Recommendations
- Top 3 measures for the next month (concrete, prioritised, with expected impact)
- Recommendation for the evolution loop: back to P1 (new features), P3 (architecture), or P5 (improvements)?
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.
- today Changed 1e0bc3f37538
- 3d ago First seen · 122 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A d5b474367e63
p8-business is a command published in the GitHub repository jonase47/ccpr (1 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,513 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
stats
Show real token usage, delegation rate, and actual savings for the current Hydra session (parses Claude Code session JSONL — no AI estimation).
map
View, rebuild, or query the codebase dependency map.
debug
Systematic debugging with automated investigation and 4-phase methodology. Default: inline evidence gathering and diagnosis. --deep: spawns systematic-debugger agent for full autonomous debugging. Use for errors, stack traces, test failures, or unexpected behavior.
double-check
Comprehensive verification with automated quality gates, confession gathering, and confidence-based issue filtering. Default: self-review with gates. --deep: multi-agent review via code-reviewer agent. Use before committing, after fixing bugs, or to validate feature completeness.
checkpoint
Create, verify, or list lightweight workflow checkpoints — name + timestamp + git SHA + a metrics delta between two points.
harness-audit
Run the deterministic harness-audit scorecard (0-10 per category) over the MindForge tree, with an optional LLM soft-signal layer.