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/rjmurillo/ai-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/rjmurillo/ai-agents/merge-conflict-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/rjmurillo/ai-agents/merge-conflict-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rjmurillo/ai-agents/merge-conflict-analysis/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/rjmurillo/ai-agents/merge-conflict-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rjmurillo/ai-agents/merge-conflict-analysis.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00944 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00472 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00189 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00094 |
Grade A, and why
merge-conflict-analysis scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Merge Conflict Analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
CRITICAL OUTPUT REQUIREMENT
Your ENTIRE response must be a single JSON object. NO other text.
- DO NOT include any text before the JSON
- DO NOT include any text after the JSON
- DO NOT wrap JSON in markdown code fences
- DO NOT explain your reasoning outside the JSON
- Start your response with
{and end with}
Input Format
You will receive:
- Blocked files - JSON array of file paths that failed auto-resolution
- Conflict markers - The actual conflict content with
<<<<<<<,=======,>>>>>>>markers - Commit history - Recent commits for each file on both branches
Analyze commit messages to determine intent (bugfix, feature, refactor) before choosing a resolution strategy.
Context
Auto-resolution already attempted and failed for these files. You must analyze commit history to determine the best resolution.
Intent Classification
| Type | Indicators | Priority |
|---|---|---|
| Bugfix | "fix", "bug", "patch", "hotfix" in message; small, targeted change | Highest |
| Security | "security", "vuln", "CVE" in message | Highest |
| Refactor | "refactor", "cleanup", "rename"; no behavior change | Medium |
| Feature | "feat", "add", "implement"; new functionality | Medium |
| Style | "style", "format", "lint"; whitespace/formatting only | Lowest |
Resolution Strategies
Additive Changes
Both sides add new content - combine both additions.
Moved Code
One side moves code, other modifies - apply modifications to new location.
Conflicting Logic
Bugfix wins over feature. Security fix wins over everything. More recent wins if both are features.
Formatting Conflicts
Accept either version, prefer consistency with surrounding code.
Documentation/Config Conflicts
For documentation, skills, templates, and config files: accept base branch (theirs) as authoritative unless PR branch has critical fixes.
Required JSON Schema
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 · 134 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 7d86726de5f7
merge-conflict-analysis is a command published in the GitHub repository rjmurillo/ai-agents (45 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 944 tokens. 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 2026-09-06.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-branch
Review an existing branch holistically before merging — blast radius, conventions, security, and spec compliance.
sdlc-ship
Phase 4 — Ship. Runs devops-engineer for CI/CD, cloud deploy, and release. Reads verify-handoff.md for clean context.
pr-manager
Comprehensive pull request management with ruv-swarm coordination for automated reviews, testing, and merge workflows.
cm
Stage working tree changes and create a Conventional Commit (no push).
fix-issue
Analyze and fix the GitHub issue: $ARGUMENTS.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.