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/patrickserrano/lacquerWrote 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/patrickserrano/lacquer/scope)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/patrickserrano/lacquer/scope"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/patrickserrano/lacquer/scope/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/patrickserrano/lacquer/scope"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/patrickserrano/lacquer/scope.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 | $0.00014 | $0.00420 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00168 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00084 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
scope 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.
What it actually says
Turn a vague ask into a bounded, verifiable task BEFORE touching code. Vague, open-ended starts ("where did we leave off", "clean up the UI") are the costliest, lowest-quality sessions — they expand into large exploratory token burns before scope is defined, and they run out of context mid-task. This template forecloses that.
Produce this frame (fill every field; ask the user only for what you genuinely can't infer)
- Goal — one sentence: the outcome, not the activity.
- In scope — the specific files/components/behaviors this task touches.
- Out of scope — what NOT to change (prevents scope creep and context bloat).
- Constraints — the rules the solution must respect (existing patterns, no new deps, perf/security boundaries, "don't touch X"). This is the field most often left implicit — state it explicitly.
- Success criteria — how we'll know it's done: the observable end state.
- Verification — the exact commands/checks that prove it (build, test, lint, a manual run). Name them now so "done" isn't a guess.
Then
- Show the frame and get a quick confirm (or proceed if it's unambiguous and low-risk).
- Do the work against the frame; if you discover scope was wrong, STOP and re-frame rather than silently widening.
- Before declaring done, run the Verification steps and report their actual output.
Resuming? Front-load, don't rebuild
If this is a continuation ("pick up where we left off"), do NOT reconstruct context by re-reading everything — that's the expensive path. Instead: read the last plan/PR/commit, state the ONE next action in a fresh frame above, and start a new session for it rather than extending a long, high-pressure thread.
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 · 36 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 2425ff66debf
scope is a command published in the GitHub repository patrickserrano/lacquer (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 420 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
parallelize
Split tasks among subagents for parallel execution.
align
Context-aware alignment. In plan mode it audits the active plan and folds the amendments in. Otherwise it reviews the branch, a named branch, or a pull request against Ion's principles, authors a fix plan, and after approval implements and commits the fixes.
trvl
Route trvl travel requests to trip planning, price watches, destination research, or advanced MCP tools.
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.