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.
npx agentmods add commands/superclaude-org/superclaude_plugin/sc-improvegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SuperClaude-Org/SuperClaude_PluginWrote 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/superclaude-org/superclaude_plugin/sc-improve)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/superclaude-org/superclaude_plugin/sc-improve"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/superclaude-org/superclaude_plugin/sc-improve.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00015 | $0.00867 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00434 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00173 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00087 |
Grade A, and why
improve 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 — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/sc:sc:sc:improve - Code Improvement
Triggers
- Code quality enhancement and refactoring requests
- Performance optimization and bottleneck resolution needs
- Maintainability improvements and technical debt reduction
- Best practices application and coding standards enforcement
Usage
/sc:sc:improve [target] [--type quality|performance|maintainability|style] [--safe] [--interactive]
Behavioral Flow
- Analyze: Examine codebase for improvement opportunities and quality issues
- Plan: Choose improvement approach and activate relevant personas for expertise
- Execute: Apply systematic improvements with domain-specific best practices
- Validate: Ensure improvements preserve functionality and meet quality standards
- Document: Generate improvement summary and recommendations for future work
Key behaviors:
- Multi-persona coordination (architect, performance, quality, security) based on improvement type
- Framework-specific optimization via Context7 integration for best practices
- Systematic analysis via Sequential MCP for complex multi-component improvements
- Safe refactoring with comprehensive validation and rollback capabilities
MCP Integration
- Sequential MCP: Auto-activated for complex multi-step improvement analysis and planning
- Context7 MCP: Framework-specific best practices and optimization patterns
- Persona Coordination: Architect (structure), Performance (speed), Quality (maintainability), Security (safety)
Tool Coordination
- Read/Grep/Glob: Code analysis and improvement opportunity identification
- Edit/MultiEdit: Safe code modification and systematic refactoring
- TodoWrite: Progress tracking for complex multi-file improvement operations
- Task: Delegation for large-scale improvement workflows requiring systematic coordination
Key Patterns
- Quality Improvement: Code analysis → technical debt identification → refactoring application
- Performance Optimization: Profiling analysis → bottleneck identification → optimization implementation
- Maintainability Enhancement: Structure analysis → complexity reduction → documentation improvement
- Security Hardening: Vulnerability analysis → security pattern application → validation verification
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 · 114 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 6f3bc819a91e
improve is a command published in the GitHub repository SuperClaude-Org/SuperClaude_Plugin (55 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 867 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
pr-address
Address PR review comments on current branch.
enforce_standards
CRITICAL: Before running the code standards enforcer, we must prepare the stack properly and abort if there are merge conflicts.
OPSX: Verify
Verify implementation matches change artifacts before archiving.
OPSX: Continue
Continue working on a change - create the next artifact (Experimental).
OPSX: Sync
Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.
context
项目上下文管理：初始化 .context 目录、记录决策日志、压缩归档、查看历史.