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 agentmods add skills/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/analyze-with-filenpx skills add catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow --skill analyze-with-filegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-WorkflowWrote 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/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/analyze-with-file)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/analyze-with-file"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/analyze-with-file.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00019 | $0.08667 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.04333 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.01733 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00867 |
Grade A, and why
analyze-with-file 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 today.
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 — 889 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyze-With-File
Interactive collaborative analysis with documented discussion process. Records understanding evolution, facilitates multi-round Q&A, and uses inline search + external research for deep exploration.
Core flow: Topic → Explore → Discuss → Refine → Conclude → Next Step
Auto mode (-y): Auto-confirm exploration decisions, use recommended angles, skip interactive scoping.
Configuration
| Flag | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
-y, --yes |
false | Auto-confirm all decisions |
--continue |
false | Continue existing session |
--depth |
standard | quick / standard / deep |
Session ID: ANL-{YYYY-MM-DD}-{slug}
- slug:
topic.toLowerCase()→ keep[a-z0-9\u4e00-\u9fa5], replace rest with-, max 40 chars - date: YYYY-MM-DD in UTC+8
- Auto-detect continue: session folder + discussion.md exists → continue mode
Artifacts
{projectRoot}/.workflow/.analysis/ANL-{date}-{slug}/
├── discussion.md # Single source of truth: rounds, decisions, conclusions, synthesis
├── state.json # Session state: config, confidence, quality tracking
├── exploration-codebase.json # Codebase exploration: files, patterns, constraints
├── research.json # External research: best practices, pitfalls, sources
└── handoff.json # Structured handoff (only on "执行任务")
| File | When Created | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
discussion.md |
Phase 1 | All analysis content: session metadata, round-by-round findings, multi-perspective synthesis, decisions, intent coverage, conclusions, recommendations. Overwritten sections: ## Current Understanding. Appended sections: ## Discussion Timeline. |
state.json |
Phase 0 | Machine-readable: current round, dimension scores, confidence history, quality tracking (pressure pass, challenge modes, stall counter), exploration metadata. Updated every round. |
exploration-codebase.json |
Phase 2 | Codebase context: project_type, relevant_files[{path, relevance, summary, dimensions[]}], patterns[{pattern, files, description}], constraints[], integration_points[{location, description}], key_findings[], _metadata{timestamp, exploration_scope} |
research.json |
Phase 2 | External research: findings[{finding, detail, confidence, source_url}], best_practices[{practice, rationale, source}], alternatives[{option, pros, cons, verdict}], pitfalls[{issue, mitigation, source}], codebase_gaps[{gap, current_approach, recommended_approach}], sources[{title, url, key_takeaway}] |
handoff.json |
Phase 4 | Only on "执行任务": source, session_id, session_folder, summary, implementation_scope[{objective, rationale, priority, target_files[], acceptance_criteria[], change_summary}], code_anchors[], key_files[], key_findings[], decision_context[], exploration_artifacts{exploration_codebase, research} — keys align with workflow-lite-plan artifactMapping |
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.
- today First seen · 889 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 14cf7f451113
analyze-with-file is a skill published in the GitHub repository catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow (2,133 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 8,667 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
audit
Audit local Claude Code transcript usage and summarize likely token hotspots. Use when the user asks where Claude Code tokens are going or wants evidence before optimizing.
optimize
Diagnose and reduce Claude Code token usage for a project or session using context hygiene, model and effort routing, MCP minimization, output trimming/sanitizing, subagent discipline, and measurement. Use when the user asks to lower Claude Code token usage, cost, context bloat, or usage-limit burn.
setup
Interactive or guided project setup for Claude Code token optimizer settings. Use when the user asks to install, configure, setup, enable hooks, or choose token-saving options interactively.
spawn-agent
Spawn worker agents (Gemini CLI or Codex CLI) to keep main context clean. Use for implementation, codebase research, context gathering, or any scoped work that would pollute the orchestrator's context.
newsroom-style
Apply AP Style and common newsroom conventions when writing or editing news articles, briefs, and headlines. Use when drafting publishable copy, editing contributor submissions, or converting informal notes into news-ready language.
beat-brief
Draft a short daily beat briefing from a folder of incoming source documents. Use when the reporter wants a five-bullet summary of the day's material with attribution flags and follow-up actions.