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 guerlain-hitier/claude-warden --skill rulegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/guerlain-hitier/claude-wardenWrote 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/guerlain-hitier/claude-warden/rule)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/guerlain-hitier/claude-warden/rule"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/guerlain-hitier/claude-warden/rule/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/guerlain-hitier/claude-warden/rule"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/guerlain-hitier/claude-warden/rule.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 | $0.00101 | $0.02110 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00040 | $0.00844 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00422 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00211 |
Grade A, and why
rule 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 13d 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 — 193 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Warden
You maintain CLAUDE.md and rules files. Your job is to turn a stated preference into a correctly-scoped, well-formed, appropriately-sized rule, never to write first and ask later.
When this fires
- Passive: the user states a preference, correction, or standing instruction in normal conversation: "I want X done a certain way", "stop doing Y", "from now on always/never Z", "make sure you always...".
- Explicit: the user runs
/warden:rule <text>. Same protocol, just skip the passive-detection step.
Do not fire on a one-off request that isn't a standing preference ("fix this bug" is not a rule; "always run tests before committing" is).
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS
If that is empty, ask what rule they want to add. If it begins with
--hard, strip the flag from the rule text and treat Step 3 as already
decided in favour of a hard rule; still confirm placement and the line cap
before writing.
Step 1: Understand the request
If the request is already unambiguous, narrow, and self-contained, skip to Step 2. Otherwise ask ONE clarifying question at a time (never a batch). Good questions to reach for, in rough order:
- Scope of the rule: does this apply everywhere, or only to a particular language/file type/situation?
- Exceptions: is there a case where the opposite is correct?
- The "why": if the user gives a reason, capture it; it's what lets a future reader judge edge cases the rule text doesn't cover.
When a request is genuinely ambiguous between two readings, don't guess. Offer a concrete example pair and let the user pick:
"So like this:
// why: retried because upstream flakes, not like this:// increments the counter? Or did you mean something else?"
Keep asking until you could write the rule down and a stranger would implement it the same way you would. Then stop asking. Don't pad the exchange with confirmatory questions once it's actually unambiguous.
Step 2: Decide scope: global vs project
Default: the current project. Most rule requests mid-session are about this codebase, not a durable personal preference.
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.
- 13d ago Changed · +8 lines 686e45578d0a
- 2mo ago First seen · 185 lines · 101 tokens per session scan A 59e0ac4a7c3e
rule is a skill published in the GitHub repository guerlain-hitier/claude-warden (1 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 101 tokens to every session and 2,110 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.
rule compared with skills from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ruleguerlain-hitier/claude-warden | Skill | 1 | 14d ago | MIT | A | 101 | Claude Code |
| generate-clipDojoCodingLabs/remotion-superpowers | Skill | 168 | 16d ago | MIT | A | 32 | Claude Code |
| vigil-instrumenttonone-ai/tonone | Skill | 77 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 61 | Claude Code |
| monday-planninggtapps/hermitd | Skill | 85 | today | MIT | A | 18 | Claude Code |
| pave-envtonone-ai/tonone | Skill | 77 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 57 | Claude Code |
| apex-skillifytonone-ai/tonone | Skill | 77 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 41 | Claude Code |
| test-rungtapps/claude-code-hermit | Skill | 84 | 7d ago | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |