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/stefan-jansen/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/stefan-jansen/claude-code-toolkit/audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/stefan-jansen/claude-code-toolkit/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/stefan-jansen/claude-code-toolkit/audit/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/stefan-jansen/claude-code-toolkit/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/stefan-jansen/claude-code-toolkit/audit.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 | $0.01193 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00477 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00239 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
audit 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Framework Infrastructure Audit
Validates Claude Code framework setup, tool installation, and infrastructure compliance.
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Usage
/audit # Full infrastructure audit
/audit --framework # Focus on framework setup only
/audit --tools # Focus on tool installation
/audit --fix # Apply fixes for detected issues
Phase 1: Framework Setup Validation
Directory Structure Audit
- Verify
.claude/directory exists and has proper structure - Check for required subdirectories:
work/,memory/,reference/ - Validate permissions on framework directories
- Ensure proper gitignore entries for sensitive files
Configuration Validation
- Check
settings.jsonexists and has valid syntax - Validate hook configurations if present
- Verify tool permissions are properly configured
- Ensure CLAUDE.md hierarchy is properly structured
Memory System Health
- Verify memory files are not corrupted
- Check import links are valid (no broken @references)
- Validate memory file sizes are within limits
- Ensure session memory is properly rotated
Phase 2: Tool Installation Audit
Core Dependencies
- Git: Version check, configuration validation
- Python Tools: ruff, black, mypy, pytest availability
- JavaScript Tools: eslint, prettier, jest (if applicable)
- System Tools: jq, flock, timeout, mktemp
Git Configuration
- Verify
git safe-commitalias is configured - Check user name and email are set
- Validate pre-commit hooks are installed
- Ensure conventional commit format is enforced
Language-Specific Tools
- Python Projects: Check pyproject.toml, requirements.txt
- JavaScript Projects: Validate package.json, node_modules
- Go Projects: Verify go.mod, tool installations
- Rust Projects: Check Cargo.toml, rust toolchain
Phase 3: Quality Infrastructure Audit
Code Quality Tools
- Verify linting tools are properly configured
- Check formatting tools work correctly
- Validate type checking is enabled where appropriate
- Ensure test runners are properly set up
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 · 175 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A 16f51388a4f3
audit is a command published in the GitHub repository stefan-jansen/claude-code-toolkit (90 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 1,193 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
workflow-classify
Classify task size (S/M/L/XL) and recommend the appropriate workflow pipeline.
pull-repos
Pull all repos (parent + marketplace clones + configured project repos).
update-counts
Explicitly refresh public toolkit and committed marketplace source snapshots and numeric documentation.
sonarqube
Analyze SonarCloud quality issues for a specific PR.
plan-start
5-phase planning command: PRD analysis, design review, technical decisions, dynamic research team, metrics. Produces a complete implementation plan + ADRs before any code is written.
refactor
Analyze code for SOLID violations and suggest targeted improvements.