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/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkitWrote 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/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/vendor-changelog)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/vendor-changelog"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/vendor-changelog/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/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/vendor-changelog"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/vendor-changelog.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 | $0.00092 | $0.02242 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.01121 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00448 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00224 |
Grade A, and why
vendor-changelog 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 8d 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 — 240 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/vendor-changelog — Vendor Functional Diff Analysis
Purpose
Solo founders building on AI-assisted toolchains depend on external maintainers shipping useful changes (and not shipping breaking ones). The toolkit pins each vendor at release time. This command reads those pins, fetches current vendor HEAD, diffs the two, and returns an actionable report.
Complementary to /vendor-audit (which assesses risk — maintainer activity,
license drift, marketing pivots) — /vendor-changelog analyzes content —
what code/docs/contract actually changed.
When to Use
- Before bumping toolkit version (so the release notes reflect upstream impact)
- Quarterly (combined with
/vendor-audit) for a full health pass - After hearing about a vendor release (e.g. Superpowers v0.50)
- Before adopting a new vendor feature into toolkit code paths
NOT for ad-hoc vendor lookup — for that, just git log directly inside
_external/<vendor>/.
Usage
/vendor-changelog # analyze all pinned vendors
/vendor-changelog --vendor <name> # one vendor only
/vendor-changelog --deep # use Supreme Council instead of single agent
/vendor-changelog --apply # propose PR drafts for ADOPT/BREAKING items
/vendor-changelog --since <date> # diff against a date instead of pinned commit
/vendor-changelog --depth <N> # increase clone depth (default 200)
/vendor-changelog --dry-run # preview what would be analyzed
Critical context for the analysis
The analysis must not rely on memorized knowledge of vendor APIs. Vendor
versions evolve faster than model training cycles. The diffs in _external/
are the source of truth.
The prompt template injects:
ANALYSIS_DATE— today (UTC)TOOLKIT_VERSION— frommanifest.json:versionTOOLKIT_BUILD_DATE— frommanifest.json:build_dateDAYS_SINCE_BUILD—ANALYSIS_DATE - TOOLKIT_BUILD_DATE
Every analysis prompt MUST start by acknowledging these values explicitly so the agent does not default to memorized knowledge.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 240 lines · 92 tokens per session scan A cab66f142857
vendor-changelog is a command published in the GitHub repository sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit (5 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 92 tokens to every session and 2,242 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
land
Cadence-tick autonomous PR babysitter (CI-fix, resolve, converge, merge, close, release).
release-notes
Generate consistent, well-structured release notes from git history. Triggered on release tags following semver patterns (v..) to produce categorized changelog with breaking changes, features, fixes, and contributor attribution.
ship
Ship is the operational release-prep flow for a connected project repo.
release-plan
A release-planning command for a software change. It documents the release scope, rollback plan, gradual or full rollout, and monitoring before waiting for human approval.
release
Standalone SDK release command for the BUILD repo. Not a workspace phase — runs independently after any number of implement/redteam cycles. Handles PyPI publishing, documentation deployment, and CI management for the kailash Python SDK and its framework packages.
create-pr
Push the current branch and open a pull request into main with a structured description derived from the branch's commits and issue references.