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/juanmhidalgo/claude-plugins/receivegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/juanmhidalgo/claude-pluginsWrote 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/juanmhidalgo/claude-plugins/receive)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/juanmhidalgo/claude-plugins/receive"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/juanmhidalgo/claude-plugins/receive.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 | $0.00038 | $0.00861 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00430 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00172 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00086 |
Grade A, and why
receive 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 5d 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 — 123 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Receive Code Review
Process code review feedback from another session. The review is external analysis, not a source of truth — findings may reference stale code, misunderstand context, or flag non-issues.
Review Content
$ARGUMENTS
Protocol
Follow these phases in order. Do NOT skip to implementation.
Phase 1: Parse Findings
Extract each finding from the review report:
- File path and line numbers
- Severity (CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW)
- Category (security, performance, bug, code quality, etc.)
- Description of the issue
- Suggested fix (if provided)
If the review format is unclear or unstructured, do your best to identify individual findings.
Phase 2: Verify Against Actual Code
For each finding, read the referenced file and check:
| Check | How |
|---|---|
| File and line still match | Read the file, compare to what the review references |
| Issue still exists | Code may have changed since the review ran |
| Finding is technically correct | The reviewer (even AI) can be wrong |
| Context was understood | Check surrounding code the reviewer may not have seen |
| Aligns with project conventions | Check CLAUDE.md and existing patterns |
Classify each finding:
- CONFIRMED — issue exists and finding is correct
- STALE — code has changed, finding no longer applies
- INCORRECT — finding misunderstands the code or is technically wrong
- DISPUTED — finding is debatable, needs user input
Phase 3: Present Verified Results
Enter plan mode using the EnterPlanMode tool.
Present findings grouped by status:
## Verified Review Findings
### Confirmed (X findings)
For each: severity, file:line, issue summary, suggested action
### Disputed (X findings)
For each: what the review says vs what the code actually does, your assessment
### Rejected (X findings)
For each: brief reason (stale / incorrect / non-issue)
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 123 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A b84377e66fa6
receive is a command published in the GitHub repository juanmhidalgo/claude-plugins (8 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 861 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
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.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.