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/YousefNabil-SOC/claude-apexWrote 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/yousefnabil-soc/claude-apex/discuss-phase)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/yousefnabil-soc/claude-apex/discuss-phase"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/yousefnabil-soc/claude-apex/discuss-phase/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/yousefnabil-soc/claude-apex/discuss-phase"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/yousefnabil-soc/claude-apex/discuss-phase.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 | $0.00015 | $0.00819 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00409 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00164 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
gsd:discuss-phase 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 10d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to gsd:discuss-phase — 46 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
How it works:
- Load prior context (PROJECT.md, REQUIREMENTS.md, STATE.md, prior CONTEXT.md files)
- Scout codebase for reusable assets and patterns
- Analyze phase — skip gray areas already decided in prior phases
- Present remaining gray areas — user selects which to discuss
- Deep-dive each selected area until satisfied
- Create CONTEXT.md with decisions that guide research and planning
Output: {phase_num}-CONTEXT.md — decisions clear enough that downstream agents can act without asking the user again
<execution_context>
@/.claude/get-shit-done/workflows/discuss-phase.md
@/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/context.md
</execution_context>
Context files are resolved in-workflow using init phase-op and roadmap/state tool calls.
CRITICAL: Scope guardrail
- Phase boundary from ROADMAP.md is FIXED
- Discussion clarifies HOW to implement, not WHETHER to add more
- If user suggests new capabilities: "That's its own phase. I'll note it for later."
- Capture deferred ideas — don't lose them, don't act on them
Domain-aware gray areas: Gray areas depend on what's being built. Analyze the phase goal:
- Something users SEE → layout, density, interactions, states
- Something users CALL → responses, errors, auth, versioning
- Something users RUN → output format, flags, modes, error handling
- Something users READ → structure, tone, depth, flow
- Something being ORGANIZED → criteria, grouping, naming, exceptions
Generate 3-4 phase-specific gray areas, not generic categories.
Probing depth:
- Ask 4 questions per area before checking
- "More questions about [area], or move to next?"
- If more → ask 4 more, check again
- After all areas → "Ready to create context?"
Do NOT ask about (Claude handles these):
- Technical implementation
- Architecture choices
- Performance concerns
- Scope expansion
<success_criteria>
- Prior context loaded and applied (no re-asking decided questions)
- Gray areas identified through intelligent analysis
- User chose which areas to discuss
- Each selected area explored until satisfied
- Scope creep redirected to deferred ideas
- CONTEXT.md captures decisions, not vague vision
- User knows next steps </success_criteria>
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 91 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A db738d236dcb
gsd:discuss-phase is a command published in the GitHub repository YousefNabil-SOC/claude-apex (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 819 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to gsd:discuss-phase, differing in 46 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
context-stats
Display context window usage and token statistics.
security-scan
Run security audit on codebase.
test-suite
Run comprehensive test suite with coverage analysis.
assemble-team
Assemble a pre-built agent team for parallel work - review, feature, debug, cross-platform, full-stack, or research.
run
Execute prompt(s) from ./prompts/ with automatic archiving - for structured prompt-based work.
standardize-claude-md
Add missing toolkit sections (Related Global Rules, Quick Start) to existing CLAUDE.md.