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/Pharaoh-so/pharaoh-mcpWrote 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/pharaoh-so/pharaoh-mcp/plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/pharaoh-so/pharaoh-mcp/plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/pharaoh-so/pharaoh-mcp/plan/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/pharaoh-so/pharaoh-mcp/plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/pharaoh-so/pharaoh-mcp/plan.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 | $0.00017 | $0.01892 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00757 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00378 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00189 |
Grade A, and why
plan 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 4d 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 — 152 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Plan Review
Architecture-aware plan review before implementation. Adapted from Garry Tan's planning framework for AI-assisted development.
You are now in plan mode. Do NOT make any code changes. Think, evaluate, and present decisions.
When to Use
Before any multi-step implementation or architectural change. When given a PRD, spec, or plan document to evaluate before writing code.
Document Review
If the user provides a document, PRD, prompt, or artifact alongside this command, that IS the plan to review. Apply all review sections to that document. Do not treat it as background context — it is the subject of evaluation.
Still run Step 1 (Reconnaissance) even when reviewing a document — always verify the plan against the actual codebase state.
Project Overrides
If a .claude/plan-review.md file exists in this project, read it now and apply those rules on top of this baseline. Project rules take precedence where they conflict.
Engineering Preferences (guide all recommendations)
- DRY: flag repetition aggressively
- Well-tested: too many tests > too few; mutation score > line coverage
- "Engineered enough" — not fragile/hacky, not over-abstracted
- Handle more edge cases, not fewer; thoughtfulness > speed
- Explicit > clever; simple > complex
- Subtraction > addition; target zero or negative net LOC
- Every export must have a caller; unwired code doesn't exist
Step 1: Pharaoh Reconnaissance (Required — do this BEFORE reviewing)
Do NOT review from memory or assumptions. Query the actual codebase first.
If Pharaoh MCP tools are available:
get_codebase_map— current modules, hot files, dependency graph- Read
docs/VISION.mdif the repo has one — the repo's architectural contract. If the plan touches a domain with a MUST-bullet, the assertion is a hard constraint on the plan. Raise it explicitly in Section 1. search_functionsfor keywords related to the plan — find existing code to reuse/extendget_module_contexton affected modules — entry points, patterns, conventionspharaoh_reconwithdependenciespairs for the affected modules — coupling, circular depsget_blast_radiuson the primary target of the change — know what breaks
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 152 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 6035cbf695d3
plan is a command published in the GitHub repository Pharaoh-so/pharaoh-mcp (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,892 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 2026-10-21.
Other commands, from other repositories
grasp-review-pr
Full PR review with blast-radius, suggested questions, and surprising-connections check.
grasp-review-delta
Detect changes since base branch and produce a risk-scored impact report.
grasp-build-graph
Run graspanalyze + graspminimalcontext for the current repo, store the sessionid, and report a 100-token orientation.
code-diagram
You are a code analysis expert. Analyze real source code and generate accurate Mermaid diagrams. Never guess or invent — every element must come directly from the code.
adr-check
Check the current change, or a plan, against the decisions that govern it and report a verdict per decision. Read-only.
sruja-confidence-report
Generate a post-AI-edit confidence report showing what changed, what evidence was checked, what risks remain, and what to inspect at 3AM.