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/kimsanguine/hplanWrote 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/kimsanguine/hplan/evidence-rubric)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/kimsanguine/hplan/evidence-rubric"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kimsanguine/hplan/evidence-rubric/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/kimsanguine/hplan/evidence-rubric"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kimsanguine/hplan/evidence-rubric.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 | $0.00074 | $0.00368 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00184 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
evidence-rubric 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 9d 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
/evidence-rubric — 8축 100점 Evidence Gate
Running for: $ARGUMENTS
이 커맨드는 hplan/evidence-rubric 스킬을 즉시 호출합니다.
Instructions
hplan/evidence-rubric스킬을$ARGUMENTS로 invoke.- 스킬이 8축(ICP · 최근 통증 이벤트 · 현재 우회법 · 반복도 · 경제적 손실 · 전환 트리거 · MVP 좁힘 · 첫 5명 획득 경로) 100점 만점 채점.
- 결과:
- 75점 이상 → BUILD 권장
- 55~74점 → INTERVIEW 권장
- 35~54점 → HOLD 권장
- 35점 미만 → PIVOT 권장
후속
- 점수가 INTERVIEW 이상이면
/interview-synthesis import워크플로우 진입. - BUILD면
/harness-build로 PRD 작성.
Output Format
8축 점수와 총점, BUILD / INTERVIEW / HOLD / PIVOT 판정, 그리고 다음 검증 조치를 반환합니다.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 31 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A e3561357a680
evidence-rubric is a command published in the GitHub repository kimsanguine/hplan (2 stars, last pushed 23d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 368 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
openehr-explain
One-stop router that explains or looks up any openEHR thing — auto-detects an archetype, a template, an RM/AM/BASE type, an RM structural concept, an ADL idiom, an AQL query or keyword, or a terminology code (replaces /archetype-explain, /template-explain, /type-spec, /rm-structure, /adl-idiom, /terminology).
start-design-plan
Start collaborative design process with brainstorming and planning.
start-implementation-plan
Create implementation plan from design document.
co-change
List files that historically co-change with a target (git log heuristic; COCHANGE-style).
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.