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/Pixel-Process-UG/superkit-agentsWrote 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/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents/debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents/debug/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/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents/debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents/debug.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 | $0.00009 | $0.00044 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00018 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00009 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00004 |
Grade A, and why
debug 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
Invoke the toolkit:systematic-debugging skill and follow it exactly as presented to you. $ARGUMENTS
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 · 6 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A 5c8c284a9f13
debug is a command published in the GitHub repository Pixel-Process-UG/superkit-agents (3 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 44 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
pm-fix
Triage pasted logs/stacks into bugs findings and todos. Does not change application code unless the user confirms.
refactor
Improve existing code: strip slop, safe refactor, tech-debt register, perf, structure review, or stack modernization.
bug
Turn a description of something broken into a GitHub issue of type Bug. Drafts a structured report, previews it, and files it only after you confirm — typed Bug where the repo supports issue types, otherwise labelled bug.
fix-ci
Diagnose failing GitHub Actions checks on a PR from the logs and fix the root cause.
qa
Structured verification pass on your changes before commit: bugs, missed requirements, wrong assumptions.
check
Diagnose .pm/ health (missing files, broken audit, stale map, unconfirmed PRD) and repair or increment without overwriting confirmed content.