ecc — everything-claude-code

A plugin pack from an Anthropic hackathon winner: a large catalog of commands, agents, skills, and hooks, invoked here through a single command — /everything-claude-code:plan, fired on every task.

Upstream

Performance

Task Weighted mean /200 within_σ between_σ Rank
feature 153.30 8.96 15.29 1 / 8
bugfix 172.31 13.54 11.70 2 / 8
refactor 173.61 8.71 16.12 6 / 8

ecc is rank-1 on feature (by ≈ 10 weighted pts over pure at 143.13 and bmad at 141.33) and rank-2 on bugfix. within_σ on feature (8.96) is mid-pack among orchestrators — the /plan planner pass produces moderately stable run-to-run quality. The mid-pack rank on refactor (6) is consistent with the rest of the orchestrator class on a task where the bare baseline takes rank-1.

Mechanism

ECC ships a sprawling plugin surface — its own documentation claims 38 agents, 156 skills, and 72 legacy command shims at v1.10.0, with additional components for cost, security, and operator workflows. The config directory confirms an MIT plugin registered through the Anthropic marketplace and a single enabledPlugins entry (everything-claude-code@everything-claude-code); no skills were manually re-keyed into ~/.claude/.

For the benchmark, a single entry point out of the full catalog was reached:

How this benchmark invoked it

scripts/manual-bench.sh (case ecc), L176–178) fires the same command on every task — there is no per-task split:

Correction (2026-05-18). Earlier versions of this profile described a load-bearing /plan-vs-/build-fix split (bugfix routed to /build-fix). That split was never implemented: scripts/manual-bench.sh has a single ecc) case with no task branch, and /everything-claude-code:build-fix is absent from every ecc transcript (feature/bugfix/refactor × t1–t5). The bugfix-performance explanation built on that premise was unfounded and has been re-derived below from the actual plan-only session data.

What the transcripts show (session audit)

Numbers below are mean across 3 trials per task (session-audit run-time subsystem is n=3; the score table above is the full n=5 cohort), from scripts/audit-sessions.py. Per-trial JSON: results/ecc/t<N>/session-audit.json (feature), results/{bugfix,refactor}/ecc/t<N>/session-audit.json. Cohort summary: results/_audits/session-audit.md.

Task wall min main turns sidechain turns sub-agent disp. files read (config / target) files edited cache hit
feature 634.1¹ 215.7 259.0 1.7 59.0 (0 / 59.0) 56.3 0.98
bugfix 22.5 46.0 58.3 1.0 22.7 (0 / 22.7) 1.3 0.95
refactor 26.3 144.0 41.0 1.0 36.7 (0 / 36.7) 25.0 0.98

¹ ecc’s feature wall-clock is suspect — all 3 trials land near 634 min regardless of turn count (t1: 633.1 / 258 turns; t2: 635.2 / 353 turns; t3: 634.2 / 813 turns). This is likely the session-lifetime of the harness (kept open past task completion), not in-flight agent time.

Why it ranked where it did

ecc’s bugfix rank-2 comes from the /plan entry’s upfront requirement restatement and scope-gating, which yields tight, small-footprint edits (≈ 1.4 files/trial) and a reproduction-test that other tools in this benchmark did not consistently produce — not from any /build-fix fast path, which does not exist in this harness. The everything-claude-code:planner subagent contributes on t1–t3 but is absent on t4–t5, so the lift is the in-context plan-and-confirm discipline, not reliable sub-agent fan-out.

On feature the same /plan upfront pass is load-bearing — ecc takes rank-1 by ≈ 10 weighted pts over the next setup. On refactor the same /plan entry point does not separate from the orchestrator pack; the bare baseline takes rank-1 across the cohort.

Strengths and failure modes

Strengths observed: the /plan planner pass produces reviewable plans with explicit confirm gates and tight edit scope; fact-forcing gate catches blast-radius before each edit; willingness to separate pre-existing failures from regressions. (No task-to-command mapping exists — one command, /plan, serves all three tasks.)

Failure modes observed: 14 eslint errors on the feature diff, 6 on the refactor — the workflow does not round-trip lint before committing. Large catalog is mostly dormant (TDD, quality-gate, code-review commands never fire unless the harness picks them). On tasks without a clear “this is a bug” framing (refactor), the tool reduces to vanilla Claude with an extra planning prelude.

Unverified items: 140K-star / 21K-fork counts on the upstream README — README claim only, not checked against GitHub.

References