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/opensesh/KARIMOWrote 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/opensesh/karimo/feedback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/opensesh/karimo/feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/opensesh/karimo/feedback/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/opensesh/karimo/feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/opensesh/karimo/feedback.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 | $0.00000 | $0.03448 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01379 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00690 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00345 |
Grade A, and why
feedback 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- feedback — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 539 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/karimo:feedback — Unified Feedback Command
Intelligent feedback capture with automatic complexity detection and adaptive investigation.
Purpose
Unified command for capturing feedback about KARIMO or Claude Code operation. Auto-detects whether feedback needs quick rule creation (simple) or deep investigation (complex).
Key Principle: Focus on "what's broken" not "what are we building."
Usage
/karimo:feedback # Interactive mode with auto-detection
/karimo:feedback --from-metrics {prd-slug} # Batch mode from execution metrics
/karimo:feedback --undo # Remove recent learnings
Adaptive Flow
Initial Feedback
│
▼
Complexity Detection
│
├─► SIMPLE PATH (70% of cases, < 5 min)
│ │
│ ├─ Ask 0-3 clarifying questions (if needed)
│ ├─ Generate rule immediately
│ ├─ Confirm with user
│ └─ Write to .karimo/learnings/{category}/
│
└─► COMPLEX PATH (30% of cases, 10-20 min)
│
├─ Notify: "This needs investigation. Starting adaptive interview..."
│
├─ Adaptive interview (3-7 questions)
│ - Problem Scoping
│ - Evidence
│ - Root Cause
│ - Desired State
│
├─ Spawn @karimo-feedback-auditor for evidence gathering
│
├─ Create feedback document (.karimo/feedback/{slug}.md)
│
└─ Present recommended changes → Apply approved changes
Interactive Mode
Step 1: Collect Initial Feedback
Prompt the user:
"What feedback do you have about how KARIMO or Claude Code is working? Describe what's broken, what's suboptimal, or patterns you want changed."
Accept free-form input. Examples:
- Simple: "Never use inline styles — always use Tailwind classes"
- Simple: "Components should have dev props like in UserCard.tsx"
- Complex: "Tests failing on deploy but passing locally — investigate why"
- Complex: "Agents keep making the same mistake but I don't know what pattern they're missing"
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 · 539 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 63543f1d3afb
feedback is a command published in the GitHub repository opensesh/KARIMO (291 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 3,448 tokens. 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
develop
Implement skill development issues with TDD-governed workflow.
code-review
Code review a pull request with BOS design system awareness.
review-pr
Comprehensive PR review using specialized agents.
cancel-ralph
Cancel active Ralph Wiggum loop.
todos
Handle the agent personal todos.md file.
tools-pass
Review internal tooling, editor workflows, and automation quality.