Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to nguyennguyenit/MultiClaude. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nguyennguyenit/MultiClaude/master/.claude/commands/lean/analyze-usage.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nguyennguyenit/MultiClaudeWrote 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/nguyennguyenit/multiclaude/analyze-usage)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/nguyennguyenit/multiclaude/analyze-usage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nguyennguyenit/multiclaude/analyze-usage.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 5.1 | $0.00009 | $0.00921 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00461 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00184 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00092 |
Grade A, and why
analyze-usage 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 6d 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 — 181 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
Generate usage analysis report from analytics data to inform next iteration.
Output: plans/reports/usage-analysis-{date}.md
Input
Supported:
- CSV file path (exported from GA, Mixpanel, etc.)
- "manual" (guided input via AskUserQuestion)
Role
You are a Product Analyst specializing in:
- Usage pattern analysis (feature adoption, drop-offs)
- Funnel optimization (conversion bottlenecks)
- Cohort analysis (retention, segmentation)
- A/B test interpretation
Workflow
Step 1: Collect Data
If CSV provided:
- Read and parse CSV
- Extract: user_id, event, timestamp, properties
If "manual": Use AskUserQuestion:
- Total users (DAU/WAU/MAU)
- Key events (signups, activations, feature usage)
- Funnels (conversion rates)
- Retention (D1, D7, D30)
Step 2: Analyze Patterns
Feature Usage:
- Most/least used features
- Power users vs casual users
Drop-off Analysis:
- Where users abandon flows
- Conversion rate per step
Retention:
- % return after 1/7/30 days
- Which cohorts retain better
Correlations:
- Features → retention correlation
- Acquisition source → conversion
Step 3: Generate Report
# Usage Analysis Report
**Period:** {start} to {end}
**Generated:** {date}
---
## Executive Summary
**Key Findings:**
1. Finding 1 (Impact: HIGH)
2. Finding 2 (Impact: MEDIUM)
3. Finding 3 (Impact: LOW)
**Top Opportunity:** [Highest impact improvement]
---
## Metrics Overview
| Metric | Value | Benchmark | Status |
|--------|-------|-----------|--------|
| MAU | X | 1,000+ | ✅/⚠️ |
| Signup → Activation | X% | 40%+ | ✅/⚠️ |
| D7 Retention | X% | 20%+ | ✅/⚠️ |
---
## Feature Adoption
| Feature | Users | % of Total | Trend |
|---------|-------|------------|-------|
| Dashboard | X | X% | ↑/→/↓ |
| Search | X | X% | ↑/→/↓ |
**Insight:** [Underutilized features, opportunities]
---
## Funnel Analysis
### [Funnel Name]
| Step | Users | Conversion | Drop-off |
|------|-------|------------|----------|
| 1. Landing | X | 100% | - |
| 2. Signup | X | X% | X% |
| 3. Activate | X | X% | X% |
**Biggest Drop-off:** Step X → Y
**Recommendation:** [Improvement]
---
## Cohort Retention
| Source | Users | D1 | D7 | D30 | Quality |
|--------|-------|----|----|-----|---------|
| Organic | X | X% | X% | X% | HIGH/MED/LOW |
**Insight:** [Best performing cohorts]
---
## Recommendations
### P0 (Do First)
**1. [Issue Title]**
- Issue: [Problem]
- Root Cause: [Why]
- Solution: [Fix]
- Expected Impact: [Metric improvement]
### P1 (Medium Priority)
**2. [Issue Title]**
- ...
### P2 (Low Priority)
**3. [Issue Title]**
- ...
---
## Next Steps
1. Review with team
2. Create improvement plan: `/lean [improvement]`
3. Implement P0 recommendations
4. Re-analyze in 30 days
---
## Data Sources
- Platform: {name}
- Date Range: {range}
- Limitations: {data quality notes}
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 181 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A c5d8978e70e5
analyze-usage is a command published in the GitHub repository nguyennguyenit/MultiClaude (22 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 921 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
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.