autoresearch:predict

A command where several expert viewpoints discuss proposed changes before implementation. It supports different review depths, rounds, scopes, goals, reviewer counts, budgets, and follow-up workflows.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for structured reviews focused on code quality, security, performance, architecture, or broader change planning.
Why use it?
It exposes disagreements, risks, and overlooked issues before code or configuration is changed.

Command for Claude Code

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/uditgoenka/autoresearch/predict
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/uditgoenka/autoresearch

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 13 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 933 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00013 $0.00933
Opus 5 $0.00006 $0.00466
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.00187
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00093

Measured yesterday against content hash 25142c252d54, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

autoresearch:predict 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 yesterday.

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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

.claude/commands/autoresearch/predict.md · 95 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

EXECUTE IMMEDIATELY.

Parse Arguments

Extract from $ARGUMENTS:

  • Scope: or --scope — file globs to analyze
  • Goal: or --goal — focus area for analysis
  • Depth: or --depth — shallow (3 personas, 1 round), standard (5, 2), deep (8, 3)
  • --personas N — override persona count (3-8)
  • --rounds N — override debate rounds (1-3)
  • --adversarial — use hostile reviewer personas instead of default
  • --budget N — max findings across all personas (default 40)
  • --fail-on <severity> — CI gate: exit non-zero if findings at/above threshold
  • --incremental — reuse existing knowledge files, update only changed files
  • --chain, --<subcommand>

Remaining text not matching flags = goal description.

Setup (if Scope or Goal missing)

AskUserQuestion (single batch): Q1 (Scope): "Which files to analyze?" — suggested globs + entire codebase Q2 (Goal): "What should personas focus on?" — code quality, security, performance, architecture, all Q3 (Depth): "How deep?" — shallow (3 personas, 1 round), standard (5, 2 — recommended), deep (8, 3) Q4 (Chain): "After analysis, chain to?" — debug, security, fix, ship, scenario, no chain If all provided → skip.

Phase 1: Reconnaissance

Scan all in-scope files. Build structured knowledge:

  • File inventory with purpose annotations
  • Dependency graph (imports/exports)
  • API surface (routes, handlers, types)
  • Data flow (inputs → processing → outputs → storage)
  • Existing test coverage map

Phase 2: Persona Generation

Load references/predict-personas.md for persona definitions.

Default set (5): Architect, Security Analyst, Performance Engineer, Reliability Engineer, Devil's Advocate. Adversarial set (--adversarial): Breaker, Cheater, Scaler, Newbie, Malicious Insider.

Each persona receives: task description + codebase knowledge + their specific evaluation criteria. Personas are isolated — no shared context between them.

Phase 3: Independent Analysis

Each persona analyzes the codebase independently:

  • Read relevant code through their lens
  • Produce findings with: title, severity, confidence (0-100%), file:line, recommendation
  • Max findings per persona: budget / persona_count

Read the full file on GitHub · 95 lines

Changes

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.

  1. yesterday First seen · 95 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 25142c252d54

Subscribe to this mod's changes

autoresearch:predict is a command published in the GitHub repository uditgoenka/autoresearch (5,966 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 933 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.