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/MattArtzAnthro/gephi-aiWrote 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/mattartzanthro/gephi-ai/counterfactual)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/mattartzanthro/gephi-ai/counterfactual"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mattartzanthro/gephi-ai/counterfactual/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/mattartzanthro/gephi-ai/counterfactual"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mattartzanthro/gephi-ai/counterfactual.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 | $0.00022 | $0.00660 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00330 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00132 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
counterfactual 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 49 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Counterfactual test
Answer $ARGUMENTS by running it as a real measurement against the graph currently
loaded in Gephi, using gephi_whatif. It duplicates the current workspace, applies
the edit to the copy, diffs the structural profile before/after, then deletes the
copy — the real graph is never touched, so this is safe to run repeatedly.
If $ARGUMENTS is empty, ask what edit they want to test (one sentence is enough:
"what if we removed the top hub?", "what if these two accounts stopped talking?").
Steps
-
Health check:
gephi_health_check. If it fails, tell the user to start Gephi and stop. -
Resolve the edit. Turn the plain-language question into
gephi_whatif's edit list (remove_node,remove_nodes,add_edge,remove_edge). If the person names nodes by label rather than id ("the top hub", "Alice"), resolve the id first —gephi_query_nodesfor a name/rank lookup,gephi_compute_degreeor the existing profile if "top hub" needs a metric to rank by. Confirm which node(s) you resolved to before running the edit if there's any ambiguity. -
Run
gephi_whatifwith the resolved edits. Only passinclude_slow: true(diffs average path length / diameter too) if the graph is roughly under 3k nodes — same cost gate asgephi_profile_graph. -
Report the diff, not a verdict.
gephi_whatifreturns measurements, and the framing matters:- Lead with the numbers that changed and by how much (components, giant-component share, density, modularity, isolates, path length if computed).
- This is a hypothesis test, not a conclusion — say what the delta does and does not support, and note the same caution that applies to any single sample: a counterfactual on a small or skewed graph, or a single removed node standing in for a whole category, can mislead.
- Offer a rival read where one exists (e.g. "components jumped because this specific hub is also a cut vertex, not because hubs in general hold the network together — want to test a second one to check?").
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 · 49 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 21e0ed27dcc3
counterfactual is a command published in the GitHub repository MattArtzAnthro/gephi-ai (22 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 660 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
deps-audit
Audit project dependencies for vulnerabilities, outdated packages, license conflicts, and supply chain risks — then provide actionable remediation strategies.
README
Git workflow and quality assurance commands for the claude-skills repository.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
dispatcher
Pick the next-best repo to work on across the portfolio — rank free repos, recommend one, claim its lease atomically, and route to the entry command.
growth-seo
SEO audit and optimization for organic search ranking.
execute
Interactive workflow for workspace isolation, pane-delegated implementation, testing, review, and cleanup.