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/Sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-marketWrote 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/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/modernize-uplift)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/modernize-uplift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/modernize-uplift/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/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/modernize-uplift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/modernize-uplift.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 | $0.00044 | $0.06170 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.02468 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.01234 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00617 |
Grade A, and why
modernize-uplift 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 today.
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
91% identical to modernize-uplift — 577 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 — 433 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Uplift legacy/$1 from $2 to $3 — same stack, newer version.
This is not /modernize-transform. There you extract intent and rewrite
idiomatically. Here the code is good; it just needs to run on a newer
runtime. You preserve structure and make the smallest diffs that compile
and behave identically on the target, driven by the known breaking
changes between $2 and $3 — not by re-deriving the business logic.
The potential advantage of a same-stack uplift: if both runtimes execute in this environment, the same test suite can run on both and your equivalence proof becomes a real differential test (run on both, diff the results). That is the strong case — but it is not always available, and the command is explicit about when it is:
- It depends on the stack. .NET can multi-target one test project to both
framework monikers (
<TargetFrameworks>net48;net8.0</TargetFrameworks>), butnet48only executes on Windows/Mono — on a Linux/macOS box or most CI sandboxes the old leg cannot run. Java 8→17 is not one suite over two targets at all — it is the whole build run twice under two JDK toolchains. Python 2→3 cannot import the same un-rewritten module under both interpreters. So "true dual-run" is the best case, common only for .NET-on-Windows. - When both runtimes are not runnable here, equivalence degrades — exactly
like
/modernize-transform— to characterization tests pinned to recorded/expected outputs on the target only. That is fine; it just must be labelled honestly (Step 0.3, Step 7).
Optional 4th arg $4 scopes to projects/modules matching a pattern.
Step 0 — Toolchain & version pinning (fail fast)
- Pin the version pair precisely. "$2 → $3". If either is vague (e.g. ".NET" with no number), stop and ask — the entire delta catalog depends on the exact pair.
- Target runtime — required for dual-run. Verify the target toolchain
builds and tests (
dotnet --version+dotnet testsmoke;mvn/gradle;python3 -V+pytest). - Source runtime — required for the baseline oracle. A same-stack uplift's
strength is that the old version also runs locally. Verify it. If the
source runtime is NOT available here (common in CI/sandboxes — e.g. no
.NET Framework on Linux), say so explicitly: dual-run degrades to
target-only, and equivalence falls back to characterization tests pinned to
recorded/expected outputs (as in
/modernize-transform). Note this in the plan and UPLIFT_NOTES — reviewers must know whether the proof was a true dual-run or target-only. - Test framework on the target — the one question that reshapes the plan.
Answer, before any planning: can the existing test suite execute on $3
as-is? The test framework is a dependency like any other, and one whose
runner/adapter does not support the target runtime is the single most
common reason an uplift's phase order comes out wrong: the test migration
is then a prerequisite, not a leaf, because nothing you migrate can be
validated until the tests that validate it run on $3. Read the framework
and version out of the test manifests and check it against $3 — NUnit 2 or
MSTest v1 cannot execute on modern .NET, JUnit 4 needs the vintage engine
on newer platforms,
nose/unittest2do not run on Python 3, and so on for whatever this stack's test manifests declare. If the answer is no, say so now: it becomes an explicit early phase in the plan (Step 2) and in/modernize-brief, never a trailing one. - Detect the ecosystem migration tool — and distinguish present /
runnable-here / actually-ran. Most of these tools need a working
restore + build (and often network), which a read-only sandbox does not
have, so "installed" ≠ "produced findings". Report all three states and
never fold a tool's findings into the catalog unless it actually ran —
say "coverage lost: needs restore+network, unavailable here" instead.
- .NET:
dotnet upgrade-assistant(loads + restores the project; also applies changes in place — see Step 5). The legacy Portability Analyzer (apiport) analyzes compiled assemblies, not source, and is Windows-centric/archived — treat as optional, not primary. - Java/Spring: OpenRewrite (
mvn rewrite:dryRunis genuinely headless and emits a patch — the most reliable of these; lean on it). - Python:
pyupgrade(source-level, runnable). Note2to3is deprecated and removed in Python 3.13;python-modernizeis abandoned — don't rely on them. - JS/Angular:
ng update(edits in place, needs a clean git tree +node_modules; no real report-only mode).
- .NET:
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.
- today First seen · 433 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 6317d4322dc7
modernize-uplift is a command published in the GitHub repository Sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market (13 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 6,170 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 91% identical to modernize-uplift, differing in 577 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
memory-report
Calibration + inventory check of your causal memory (prediction ledger accuracy, what you know).
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.
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.