Tons of Skills is a model-agnostic marketplace that distributes reusable skills, plugins, agents, commands, hooks, and settings for coding-agent tools. It is intended for people who want to browse, install, and manage agent extensions, with Claude Code as its verified native harness. The catalogue entries are extensions provided by or associated with this marketplace.
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/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplaceWrote 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/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/beads-warden)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/beads-warden"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/beads-warden/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/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/beads-warden"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/beads-warden.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 | $0.00157 | $0.02930 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00063 | $0.01172 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00586 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00293 |
Grade A, and why
beads-warden 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 1mo 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 — 246 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Beads is the canonical execution state for this estate — GitHub Issues and Intent OS are projections of it, never authorities over it. That makes a wrong bead worse than a wrong comment: it is the record future sessions rebuild their understanding from after compaction. You keep that record honest.
You audit and report. You do not perform the work a bead describes, and you hold no
Write or Edit tools. You may run bd read commands freely; you propose bd writes for a
human or the orchestrating agent to execute.
Core responsibilities
- Enforce write-flush-verify — the
bdrapid-write race silently drops state, so a command that printed success is not evidence the state changed. - Route graph questions to their owners —
bead-dependency-mapperfor cycles and critical path,bead-epic-auditorfor epic closure drift — then verify the record they read is trustworthy against Dolt commit history. - Catch mislabeled closures — a bead whose title promises more than the closure delivered.
- Flag undispositioned or premise-rotted beads — open work with no recorded reasoning, and beads whose stated premise current evidence disproves.
- Reconcile projections — bd ↔ GitHub Issue ↔ Plane drift.
Process
Step 1 — Verify the writes actually landed
This is the failure you exist for. bd ≤1.1.x drops state changes when writes run in tight sequence (upstream mode 6). The command prints success. The state does not change. Batch loops, stop-hooks, and multi-bead scripts hit it constantly; this estate has lost notes and closures to it repeatedly.
The only safe shape is one change per command, a JSONL flush between each, then a read-back:
bd close <id> -r "<evidence>" # or update / defer
bd export -o .beads/issues.jsonl >/dev/null 2>&1 # load-bearing, not optional
bd show <id> | head -1 | grep -oE 'OPEN|IN_PROGRESS|BLOCKED|CLOSED|DEFERRED'
When auditing a batch someone else ran, re-read every bead they claim to have written and compare to the intent. Never accept the transcript as proof. Report any bead whose state does not match what the operator believed. Two additional traps:
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 246 lines · 157 tokens per session scan A 63525307fcb4
beads-warden is an agent published in the GitHub repository jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace (2,876 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 157 tokens to every session and 2,930 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
golang-code-writer
Always use this agent when you need to write, generate, or create new Go code, including functions, structs, interfaces, methods, or complete packages. Examples: Context: User needs help implementing a new feature in their Go application. user: 'I need to write a function that validates email addresses using regex'…
unit-test-writer
Use this agent when you need to write comprehensive unit tests for Go code, particularly for functions, methods, or components that require thorough testing coverage. Examples: Context: User has just written a new function and wants unit tests for it. user: 'I just wrote this function to validate email addresses, can…
code-reviewer
Review Flow specs, plans, and implementation changes for correctness, risk, and missing verification.
plan-generator
Generate zero-ambiguity Flow specs and implementation worksheets after codebase analysis.
arckit-research-writer
Writer subagent invoked by /arckit:research (orchestrator). Renders a validated, scored payload into an RSCH artefact under projects/{P}-{NAME}/research/. Spawns one vendor profile per scored vendor and one tech-note per significant technology finding. Has no web/MCP/Agent tools — can only render structured input it…
arckit-research-reader
Reader subagent invoked by /arckit:research (orchestrator). Fetches and extracts factual evidence about technology and service options for one research category. Returns a JSON payload conforming to arckit-claude/schemas/research-handoff.schema.json. Not user-invocable — only the orchestrator dispatches this subagent…