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.
npx skills add amirfish1/claude-command-center --skill second-opiniongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/amirfish1/claude-command-centerWrote 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/skills/amirfish1/claude-command-center/second-opinion)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/amirfish1/claude-command-center/second-opinion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/amirfish1/claude-command-center/second-opinion/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/skills/amirfish1/claude-command-center/second-opinion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/amirfish1/claude-command-center/second-opinion.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 | $0.00063 | $0.01352 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00541 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00270 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00135 |
Grade C, and why
second-opinion scanned grade C with 3 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Sends data to an external URLmediumData exfiltration
A POST to an outside endpoint may be telemetry or may be exfiltration; either way the mod talks to somewhere, and you should know where.
curl -s -X POST "$CCC_URL/api/sessions/spawn" -H "Content-Type: application/json" -d @- <<'JSON' Reads agent configuration directoriesmediumAgent snooping
.claude/, .codex/, .gemini/ hold keys, settings and other credentials a mod has no legitimate need for.
CCC_URL="$(cat ~/.claude/command-center/port.txt 2>/dev/null || echo "${CCC_URL:-http://127.0.0.1:8090}")" Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
curl -sf --max-time 2 "$CCC_URL/api/version" >/dev/null 2>&1 || CCC_URL="http://127.0.0.1:8090" The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 111 lines · 63 tokens per session scan C fb114d72001d
second-opinion is a skill published in the GitHub repository amirfish1/claude-command-center (189 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 1,352 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it C with 3 findings (sends data to an external url, reads agent configuration directories, makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-10-12.
Other skills, from other repositories
md-audit
Read-only code quality audit — scan the current working directory for common issues (bugs, dead code, security hotspots, missing error handling) and return a prioritised findings report. No files are edited. Use when asked to "audit the code", "quick audit", "find issues", "code scan", or "what's wrong with this…
resolve-review-pr
Review an existing fix PR using the audited repro and full diff, preserving branch and approval rules.
oracle
Oracle second-model review: bundle prompts/files, debug, refactor, design.
resolve-impact-assessment
Check the full candidate diff, affected consumers, focused tests, evidence identities, and verification gaps.
cocoreview
CocoReview — structured code review with six-severity findings vocabulary, progressive disclosure architecture, and universal anti-pattern baseline. Invoked via $review [file] [--complexity] [--security] [--architecture] [--language ].
brutal-honesty-review
Unvarnished technical criticism combining Linus Torvalds' precision, Gordon Ramsay's standards, and James Bach's BS-detection. Use when code/tests need harsh reality checks, certification schemes smell fishy, or technical decisions lack rigor. No sugar-coating, just surgical truth about what's broken and why.