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/juan294/cc-rpi/implementgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/juan294/cc-rpiWhat 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 | $0.00618 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00309 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00124 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00062 |
Grade A, and why
implement 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.
What it actually says
Implement the plan at: $ARGUMENTS
Model tier: sonnet — Sonnet 5 (1M context) session. All subagents: model: "sonnet".
Process:
- Read the plan completely. Check for existing checkmarks.
- Spawn Explore agents (model:
"sonnet") to gather relevant context. - Create tasks (TaskCreate) to track progress.
- Enter a worktree for implementation (EnterWorktree tool).
Research and planning happen against
main-- implementation must be isolated to avoid conflicts with other agents or uncommitted work on the shared branch. - Check if remaining phases are marked
[batch-eligible]in the plan.- If ALL remaining phases are batch-eligible, suggest using
/batchto execute them in parallel (one worktree per phase, each opens a PR). - If user agrees, hand off to
/batchwith the plan reference. Done. - If user declines or phases have dependencies, continue sequentially below.
- If ALL remaining phases are batch-eligible, suggest using
- For the CURRENT phase only:
a. Delegate implementation to subagents (up to 3, model:
"sonnet"). b. When done, submit to a reviewer subagent (model:"sonnet") focused on PLAN COMPLIANCE: does the code match what the plan specified? Are all items addressed? c. If reviewer requests fixes, send back to implementer. d. Repeat until reviewer approves. e. Run/simplifyon the changed files — this is Anthropic's native code quality pass (reuse, quality, efficiency). It spawns 3 specialized agents and applies fixes. f. Run ALL automated verification commands (tests, typecheck, lint, build). g. Update checkboxes in the plan file. h. If you departed from the plan, append the decision todocs/plans/<plan-name>-notes.mdunder## Deviations, as: plan said / found / chose / why. Deviations only -- never narration, and no file at all if the phase had none./validatereads it. Commit it with the phase. You are in a worktree: an uncommitted notes file is destroyed at teardown, before/validateever sees it..gitignoreexcludesdocs/plans/*but re-includes*-notes.mdprecisely so these survive -- do not re-ignore them. Reference the plan by NAME in backticks, never as a markdown link: the plan itself stays untracked, so a link to it dangles in a clean checkout and fails CI's link check. - STOP. Report results and wait for human confirmation.
- Do NOT proceed to the next phase without confirmation.
If plan doesn't match reality:
- STOP and present: Expected vs Found vs Why it matters.
- Ask how to proceed.
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 · 44 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A d01f2ce0ff6f
implement is a command published in the GitHub repository juan294/cc-rpi (5 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 618 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
test
Smart test runner with filtering, coverage, and health monitoring.
safe-refactor
Safe refactoring with automated review, testing, and rollback capabilities.
vd-arch-review
Audita arquitetura de código em 3 níveis (macro/meso/micro). Detecta separação de camadas, anti-patterns, vazamento de abstração, dependências externas vs código customizado, acoplamento. User-invoked, sob demanda, para devs (não leigo). Use quando o usuário pede "auditoria arquitetural", "code review arquitetural"…
validate
Run SDLC compliance check against the current project. Validates build system, code quality, testing, CI/CD, security, documentation, VCS, and release configurations.
progress
You are generating a visual progress report showing which phases are complete, in-progress, or pending for the current feature.
commit
You are creating a conventional commit scoped to the current phase of work.