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/xzawed/claude-grok-build-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/xzawed/claude-grok-build-plugin/resume)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/xzawed/claude-grok-build-plugin/resume"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xzawed/claude-grok-build-plugin/resume/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/xzawed/claude-grok-build-plugin/resume"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xzawed/claude-grok-build-plugin/resume.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00725 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00290 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
resume 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 12d 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 — 46 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Continue Grok work in the same session instead of starting cold.
Steps
- Call
grok_auth_checkwith the absolutecwdyou will resume in. Ifok: false, stop and showmessage. - Call
grok_build_usagewith the project absolutecwd(and a smalllimitif desired). - Read
lastSession.sessionId(preferred). If missing, scanrecentfor the newest entry that hassessionId. - If still no session id:
- Tell the user there is no resumable session in history yet.
- Suggest a fresh
/grok:delegate(or usesessionIdfrom a prior tool result if they still have it in chat). - Stop without inventing an id.
- Call
grok_build_delegatewith:prompt= the user's follow-up taskcwd= absolute project path (preferlastSession.cwdwhen it matches the project)resume= that sessionId (do not also setcontinue)
- If
statusis notcompleted(auth_error,timeout, orgrok_error), show the returnedmessageand stop — do not report the run as done;filesChangedmay still list partial edits. Otherwise showsummary,filesChanged,billing, and the newsessionIdif returned — plus themessageofbillingCaveatwhen the result carries one (a warning; do not stop on it). A completed result can also carry amessage— show it whenever there is one: besides a commit notice or where the session lives, it can say that the prompt, with any files it @-mentions or skill it invokes, was too long for grok (its request to the model left out part of the prompt or of what grok added to it), so the work may not reflect the whole prompt. Ifcommittedistrue, grok made a git commit although this plugin never commits — show the returnedmessage: it names the folder whose HEAD moved and the commit it moved from, with how to inspect and undo it there (never run those commands in another folder). Do not read an empty or shortfilesChangedas "nothing changed": committed files are no longer listed. Ifcommittedis absent, the run could not be checked — do not report "no commit" (a resume whose session could not be located is one such run). IfresumedCwdis present, the resumed session belongs to that directory and grok worked THERE, not in thecwdyou passed — review the diff there. - Do not commit — user/Claude review the diff first.
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.
- 12d ago Changed · +4 lines f64b4aa01b43
- 28d ago Changed · +7 lines 276d40a66bde
- 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines 0944f11769c3
- 1mo ago Changed · +3 lines 37266e44bbf2
- 1mo ago First seen · 31 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A ca0ca343d9e1
resume is a command published in the GitHub repository xzawed/claude-grok-build-plugin (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 725 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
merge
Finish a PR properly: every check green, every review addressed — human and bot — then merge and clean up.
spec
Spec-first design: a gap-closing interview that produces a complete spec, with a quality controller that blocks until every section is answered and every question resolved.
debug
Systematic debugging: root cause before any fix, one hypothesis at a time, and a three-strikes rule that questions the architecture instead of stacking patches.
plan
Turn an approved spec into an implementation plan an engineer with zero context could execute — with a quality controller that blocks placeholders and hollow tasks.
tdd
Test-driven development with tests that actually catch breaks: red before green, name the break each test catches, and the mutation check before done.
todo
The quality-gated task list: tasks with real descriptions, testable acceptance criteria, and evidence — a task only closes when the controller agrees it is done.