Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to ucsandman/DashClaw. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ucsandman/DashClaw/main/.claude/commands/dashclaw-postcommit.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ucsandman/DashClawWrote 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/ucsandman/dashclaw/dashclaw-postcommit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ucsandman/dashclaw/dashclaw-postcommit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ucsandman/dashclaw/dashclaw-postcommit/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/ucsandman/dashclaw/dashclaw-postcommit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ucsandman/dashclaw/dashclaw-postcommit.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 | $0.00031 | $0.00346 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00138 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00069 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00035 |
Grade A, and why
dashclaw-postcommit 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.
What it actually says
Dispatch these three subagents IN ONE MESSAGE so they run concurrently. Each agent
definition carries its own model:; do not override it.
dashclaw-gate-runner— "Run the DashClaw verification gates (lint, full vitest, build, and the contract checks if routes/SDK/schema changed) and report only failures plus a pass/fail verdict. $ARGUMENTS"dashclaw-drift-auditor— "Audit the drift-prone counts and the unified version against live truth. Scope of change: the pending changes on the current branch (use git diff/status to find them). $ARGUMENTS"dashclaw-security-reviewer— "Security-review the pending changes on the current branch (use git diff/status to find them). Focus on the DashClaw auth / API-key / x402 / webhook / repository-SQL / secrets surface. $ARGUMENTS"
When all three return, produce ONE combined verdict:
- PASS only if all three passed. Otherwise FAIL.
- List every failure with
file:lineand which agent found it. - Do not summarize passing output; do not paste logs.
- If any agent errored or failed to authenticate rather than completing, say so loudly and count the wave as FAIL — a skipped review is not a passed review.
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 · 27 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A e23655c9d7b3
dashclaw-postcommit is a command published in the GitHub repository ucsandman/DashClaw (313 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 346 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
align
Context-aware alignment. In plan mode it audits the active plan and folds the amendments in. Otherwise it reviews the branch, a named branch, or a pull request against Ion's principles, authors a fix plan, and after approval implements and commits the fixes.
resolve-dependabot-prs
Triage open Dependabot PRs, return a quick risk/action summary table, then enter planning mode with an ordered rebase→merge→follow-up→resume resolution plan.
squash
Rebuild unlanded commits on main or a worktree branch into clean conventional commits while preserving the exact final tracked tree.
audit-quick
Run a quick codebase orientation scan — Phases 0 and 1 only (architecture map + health assessment). Skips deep analysis (security, performance, code quality) and the roadmap. Good for onboarding onto a new project or a fast pre-review checkup. Run /audit --resume later to continue with the deep phases.
review-code
Call getworkflowcommandguidance(kind="design-plan", focus="Architecture focus: inspect saved scripts against their current step objectives, input/output contracts, and relevant retained behavior. Propose improvements without applying them.
run-technical-review
Run /run-technical-review as a BACKGROUND task so this chat stays responsive. If the runinbackground tool is available: call runinbackground with name "Technical review + fix", completionmode "presentresult", the review instruction below, and a messagesequence with one follow-up message (id "fix") carrying the fix…