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/pleaseai/claude-code-pluginsWrote 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/pleaseai/claude-code-plugins/create)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/pleaseai/claude-code-plugins/create"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/pleaseai/claude-code-plugins/create/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/pleaseai/claude-code-plugins/create"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/pleaseai/claude-code-plugins/create.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 | $0.00013 | $0.00404 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00202 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00081 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
create 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 yesterday.
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
Create a new Graphite-tracked branch on top of the current branch, carrying the working-tree changes as a single commit. User input: $ARGUMENTS.
Steps
- Run
git status --shortto confirm there are changes to commit. If the tree is clean, ask the user whether they meant to rungt create --onto <branch>(create empty branch on top of another). - Run
gt lsto show the current stack so the user can confirm where the new branch lands. - Build the command:
- If
$ARGUMENTSlooks like a commit message (contains spaces or:), usegt create -am "$ARGUMENTS"— Graphite derives the branch name from the message. - If
$ARGUMENTSis a single token, treat it as a branch name. Ask the user for a commit message, then run:gt create -am "<message>" $ARGUMENTS. - If
$ARGUMENTSis empty, ask the user for a commit message (or branch name) before proceeding.
- If
- Run the command and report the new branch and updated
gt ls.
Key flags
-a, --all— stage every modified file (default for this command)-m, --message <msg>— commit message (and source of the auto-generated branch name)-p, --patch— interactive hunk staging instead of-a--insert— insert this branch between the current branch and its children, restacking dependents--onto <branch>— create on top of a different branch (useful with worktrees)--ai— let Graphite suggest a branch name / message
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.
- yesterday First seen · 27 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 2b90bac4f6c9
create is a command published in the GitHub repository pleaseai/claude-code-plugins (13 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 404 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-07.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-diff
Review the current working diff for correctness, security, and reuse.
elegant-code-review
Review the current working diff against the elegant-code decision ladder and propose deletions, honoring the negligence floor.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
prp-commit
Quick commit with natural language file targeting: describe what to commit in plain English.
fix-comments
Address PR review comments by implementing requested changes automatically.
validate-pr-description
Use when validating a PR title and description for conventional commit format, issue linking keywords, and template compliance before submission.