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/Marcel-Bich/marcel-bich-claude-marketplaceWrote 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/marcel-bich/marcel-bich-claude-marketplace/cleanup)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/marcel-bich/marcel-bich-claude-marketplace/cleanup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/marcel-bich/marcel-bich-claude-marketplace/cleanup/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/marcel-bich/marcel-bich-claude-marketplace/cleanup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/marcel-bich/marcel-bich-claude-marketplace/cleanup.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 | $0.00018 | $0.01850 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00925 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00370 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00185 |
Grade A, and why
cleanup 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 11d 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 — 257 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Claude-Dogma: Cleanup AI Traces
You are executing the /dogma:cleanup command. Your task is to find and fix AI-typical patterns in the codebase that reveal AI/agent usage.
Step 1: Load Rules
Check for Dogma Rules First
Look for AI trace rules in this order:
GUIDES/ai-traces.md- Dedicated AI traces documentationCLAUDE/CLAUDE.git.md- Check for<ai_traces>sectionCLAUDE.git.md- Check for<ai_traces>section.claude/CLAUDE.git.md- Check for<ai_traces>section
If found, extract the rules:
Found AI trace rules in GUIDES/ai-traces.md:
- Typography: Use straight quotes " (U+0022), normal dashes - (U+002D), three dots (...)
- Avoid: Curly quotes (U+201C/U+201D), em-dashes (U+2014), smart apostrophes (U+2018/U+2019), ellipsis (U+2026)
- Phrases: Avoid "Let me...", "Sure!", etc.
- Emojis: Never in code comments or logs
Fallback: Default Rules
If no Dogma rules found, use these defaults:
DEFAULT_RULES:
Typography:
- Curly quotes: " (U+201C) and " (U+201D) -> straight quotes " (U+0022)
- Em-dash: -- (U+2014) and en-dash -- (U+2013) -> normal dash - (U+002D)
- Ellipsis: ... (U+2026) -> three dots ...
- Smart apostrophes: ' (U+2018), ' (U+2019), ‚ (U+201A) -> straight ' (U+0027)
Emojis in Code:
- Remove emojis from: comments, variable names, log messages
- Keep emojis in: UI strings, user-facing output
Phrases (in comments/docs):
- "Let me..." -> remove or rephrase
- "I'll..." -> remove or rephrase
- "Sure!" -> remove
- "Certainly!" -> remove
- "Great question!" -> remove
German Umlauts (optional, ask user):
- In strings: ae->ä, oe->ö, ue->ü, ss->ß (where appropriate)
- In code identifiers: keep ASCII (ae, oe, ue, ss)
Step 2: Determine Scan Path
The user provided: $ARGUMENTS
- If empty: scan current directory
- If path provided: scan that path
SCAN_PATH="${1:-.}"
Step 3: Find Files to Scan
Exclude common non-code directories:
# Find source files, excluding:
# - node_modules, .git, dist, build, vendor, __pycache__
# - Binary files, images, etc.
EXCLUDE_DIRS="node_modules|\.git|dist|build|vendor|__pycache__|\.next|coverage"
INCLUDE_EXTENSIONS="js|ts|jsx|tsx|py|rb|go|java|php|md|txt|json|yaml|yml|sh|bash"
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 257 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 00ea1c1c37fc
cleanup is a command published in the GitHub repository Marcel-Bich/marcel-bich-claude-marketplace (13 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,850 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
bootstrap
Verifies and repairs the Claude Code Toolkit installation.
hades-show-traces
Point the user to Charon, Hades' trace explorer.
perf
Structured performance investigation with baselines, profiling, and evidence-backed decisions.
bug-fix
Streamlines bug fixing by creating a GitHub issue first, then a feature branch for implementing and thoroughly testing the solution before merging.
health-check
Run diagnostics on Claude Code toolkit configuration and status.
feature:bugfix
Systematic bug investigation and fixing workflow for existing features. Uses code-reviewer for deep analysis, code-consolidator for context, parallel web research for solutions, and atomic phase implementation with review gates.