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/koolamusic/claudefilesWrote 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/koolamusic/claudefiles/flow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/koolamusic/claudefiles/flow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/koolamusic/claudefiles/flow/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/koolamusic/claudefiles/flow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/koolamusic/claudefiles/flow.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 | $0.00052 | $0.00921 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00368 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00184 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00092 |
Grade A, and why
flow scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Translate the active sprint's acceptance predicates into steps a human can walk. Not a test harness — a walkthrough. The reader is a person with a browser, a terminal, and no context.
Position in the loop
Three sensors cover one goal set (features/*.feature): nyquist senses machine-testable predicates during execute; flow is the human sensor — it tells a person how to observe the rest; warden senses deterministically post-sprint. Flow's output also feeds /warden:design (Prerequisites, Identity scope).
Steps
-
Locate the active sprint:
slug=$(cat .jira/CURRENT). If empty or missing, stop. -
Read the sources:
.jira/sprints/<slug>/features/*.feature— the predicates (required; if missing, stop and point at/jira:plan)- All
*-PLAN.md— implementation context per predicate (viaeffects:);--plan Nnarrows to one plan's predicates CONTEXT.md— locked decisions that shape expected behaviorEXECUTION.md## Nyquist resultsblock, if present — which predicates are already machine-sensed
-
Classify each predicate:
machine-sensed— a nyquist results line carries its ID with a green testhuman-required— markednot_testable_in_code/covered-by-inspection, or no nyquist line at all- If EXECUTION.md doesn't exist yet (pre-execute), every predicate is
human-required
-
Write
.jira/sprints/<slug>/FLOW.md:--- sprint: <slug> generated: <iso date> predicates: <total> (<human-required count> need human sensing) --- # Flow: <sprint goal> ## Before you start Services to run, accounts to use, data that must exist — concrete: the command that starts the server, the exact login email/role (never a password — reference where it's shared), the seed state. ## Verify by hand (predicates machines could not sense) ### TOK-02 — <scenario title> 1. Log in as <role> at <route> 2. <do the Given — set up the precondition> 3. <do the When — the action, exact button/route/command> 4. **Expect:** <the Then, observably — what you see when it holds, and what failure would look like> ## Already machine-sensed (spot-check optional) ### TOK-01 — <scenario title> — sensed by `tests/auth.test.ts` One-line human spot-check, for skeptics.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 71 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 6a0f351fe5c8
flow is a command published in the GitHub repository koolamusic/claudefiles (130 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 921 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
playwright-test-heal
Run all my tests and fix the failing ones.
webapp-testing
Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.
verify-pr
Verify a PR's frontend changes through browser automation.
test-run
Run E2E tests with qa-use CLI.
ui-snapshot.template
This prompt was authored for Claude-style slash workflows. In Codex runtime, adapt tool calls as follows.
laravel-playwright
E2E Playwright patterns; use the laravel:e2e-playwright skill exactly as written.