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/XRenSiu/claude-code-forgeWrote 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/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/fix/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/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/fix.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 | $0.00018 | $0.01768 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00707 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00354 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00177 |
Grade A, and why
fix 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 — 212 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/fix 命令
快速启动问题修复流程，自动激活 issue-fixer Agent 和 systematic-debugging Skill。
使用方式
# 基本用法：修复指定文件的问题
/fix src/auth/login.ts
# 根据审查报告修复
/fix --review docs/reviews/code-review-2024-01-15.md
# 修复特定优先级的问题
/fix --priority critical
# 启动验证循环（自动重新审查直到通过）
/fix --loop
# 指定最大循环次数
/fix --loop --max-rounds 5
# 修复并重新运行审查
/fix --loop src/auth/ --prd docs/prd/auth.md
参数说明
| 参数 | 说明 | 默认值 |
|---|---|---|
<path> |
要修复的文件或目录 | 当前目录 |
--review <file> |
审查报告文件路径 | - |
--prd <file> |
PRD 文档（用于规格验证） | - |
--priority <level> |
只修复指定优先级（critical/important/suggestion） | all |
--loop |
启动验证循环 | false |
--max-rounds <n> |
最大循环次数 | 5 |
--no-tdd |
跳过 TDD（不推荐） | false |
执行流程
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ /fix 执行流程 │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ 1. 解析输入 │
│ ├── 有 --review？→ 读取审查报告 │
│ └── 无 --review？→ 扫描代码查找问题 │
│ │
│ 2. 激活 systematic-debugging Skill │
│ └── 按 4+1 阶段分析每个问题 │
│ │
│ 3. 调用 issue-fixer Agent │
│ ├── 分类问题（CRITICAL/IMPORTANT/SUGGESTION） │
│ ├── 根因分析 │
│ ├── TDD 修复 │
│ └── 验证修复 │
│ │
│ 4. 如果 --loop │
│ ├── 重新运行审查 │
│ ├── 有新问题？→ 回到步骤 3 │
│ ├── 全部通过？→ 完成 │
│ └── 超过 max-rounds？→ 停止，人工干预 │
│ │
│ 5. 输出修复报告 │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
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 · 212 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A e22dc69d622f
fix is a command published in the GitHub repository XRenSiu/claude-code-forge (2 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,768 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-05.
Other commands, from other repositories
bugfix
Bug fix workflow: root cause analysis → user review → regression test + fix via TDD.
fix-issue
Find and fix issue #$ARGUMENTS. Follow these steps.
tdd
Correction de Bug en Mode TDD/BDD.
fix
Correction automatisee des bugs identifies par la QA Recette.
qa
Validate an application against a Gherkin user story by spawning a QA team that drives the running app.
hatch3r-bug-pipeline
Run a known-cause bug fix through a 3-phase test-first pipeline -- reproduce + root-cause, regression-test + fix together, then root-cause-depth review -- with full sub-agent delegation.