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/Rito-w/claude-code-best-practice-zhWrote 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/rito-w/claude-code-best-practice-zh/implement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/rito-w/claude-code-best-practice-zh/implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rito-w/claude-code-best-practice-zh/implement/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/rito-w/claude-code-best-practice-zh/implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rito-w/claude-code-best-practice-zh/implement.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 | $0.00006 | $0.03665 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.01466 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00733 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00366 |
Grade A, and why
implement 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to implement — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 635 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
You MUST parse the user input to extract the feature slug (the folder name in rpi/).
Purpose
This command executes phased implementation of features based on planning documentation. It orchestrates specialized agents, enforces validation gates, and ensures constitutional compliance throughout implementation.
Prerequisites:
- Feature folder exists at
rpi/{feature-slug}/ - Planning completed (
rpi/{feature-slug}/plan/PLAN.mdexists)
Output Location: rpi/{feature-slug}/implement/
This is Step 4 of the RPI Workflow (final step - actual implementation).
Flags
--phase N: Execute specific phase number (1-8), if omitted starts from phase 1--validate-only: Only validate current phase, don't implement--skip-validation: Skip validation gate and proceed (use with caution)
Available Agents
All agents use Opus model for maximum quality.
Implementation Agent
| Agent | Type | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
senior-software-engineer |
Custom | All implementation tasks |
Support Agents
| Agent | Type | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
Explore |
Built-in | Pre-implementation code exploration |
code-reviewer |
Custom | Code review and quality validation |
constitutional-validator |
Custom | Validate against project constitution |
documentation-analyst-writer |
Built-in | Documentation generation |
Agent Routing
All implementation tasks are handled by the senior-software-engineer agent.
Phase 0: Load Context and Rules
Prerequisites: Feature slug parsed from user input
Process:
0.1 Load Project Constitution
- Check for a constitution or principles document in the repository
- If exists, extract:
- Technical constraints (type safety, testing, component isolation)
- Business principles (quality standards, workflow)
- Architectural boundaries
- Store constraints for enforcement during implementation
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 · 635 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A 2ba1c8ae518b
implement is a command published in the GitHub repository Rito-w/claude-code-best-practice-zh (10 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 3,665 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to implement, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
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.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.