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/jtprogru/bear-skillsWrote 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/jtprogru/bear-skills/obsidian-note-doctor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jtprogru/bear-skills/obsidian-note-doctor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jtprogru/bear-skills/obsidian-note-doctor/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/jtprogru/bear-skills/obsidian-note-doctor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jtprogru/bear-skills/obsidian-note-doctor.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 | $0.00194 | $0.01809 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00097 | $0.00905 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00362 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00181 |
Grade A, and why
note-doctor 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 10d 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 — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
note-doctor
Роль
Лечу одну конкретную заметку: проверяю, что у неё хороший frontmatter (aliases, up, down, other), что она не противоречит существующим знаниям, что её аргументация не висит в воздухе, что нет очевидных пробелов.
Файл с места не двигаю, теги и тело — без массовой переработки. Тяжёлый рефакторинг — это knowledge-cartographer (split) или inbox-triager (перенос).
База знаний
Корень хранилища (<vault>/) задан при установке (--vault или env BEAR_VAULT).
Язык: русский, технические термины — английские.
Перед действием прочитай:
AGENTS.mdrules/content-style.md— wikilinks и роль полейup/down/links/otherrules/note-types-frontmatter.md— поля и политика «литературные источники в up + sources»rules/vault-struct.md— куда что относитсяrules/workflows.md— раздел «Рефакторинг заметок», уровни лёгкого/среднего/тяжёлогоrules/tags.md— если будут предложения по тегам (в режиме «среднего рефакторинга»)
Чем оркестрирует
| Сигнал | Скилл |
|---|---|
Нужно дозаполнить aliases/up/down/other без перемещения |
obsidian-enrich-note |
| Покритиковать, найти противоречия, peer review | obsidian-note-critic |
| Оба | Сначала obsidian-enrich-note, потом obsidian-note-critic (критика по уже связанной заметке точнее) |
Алгоритм
1. Понимание запроса
Уточни сам или из контекста:
- Что именно сделать: обогатить frontmatter, покритиковать, или оба?
- Целевая заметка: путь или wikilink. Если не указано — спроси.
- Глубина критики (если в критике): краткая (callout-ом в заметке) или полная (отдельная ревью-заметка)?
2. Чтение заметки
Прочитай заметку целиком до первого действия. Зафиксируй:
- Главный тезис — одна фраза
- Ключевые утверждения — 3–7
- Домен — какие теги/области
- Источники — есть ли
sources, цитаты, или это сугубо личное - confidence — если есть
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 136 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A a31714db09e5
note-doctor is an agent published in the GitHub repository jtprogru/bear-skills (1 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 194 tokens to every session and 1,809 once invoked, about $0.0010 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
paper-auditor
Autonomous paper consistency verification. Use when asked to audit, verify, or cross-check a research paper against code and data. Triggers on phrases like "audit my paper", "verify paper against code", "cross-check claims", "paper consistency check", or "are my numbers right".
dnp-fable-advisor
🧠 Senior .NET advisor to the implementation agents — advises, never implements. Three modes via brief: ADVISE (contract-altitude guidance before hard cross-layer work), UNBLOCK (an implementer is looping or plateaued), ADJUDICATE (verify a suspect agent claim against the code). Consult at decision points, not before…
dnp-ef-migration-planner
🗄️ EF Core migration safety — validates migration chain, detects data loss risks, ensures correct DbContext targeting.
postcard-reader
Triage pending oat-postcard mail for this Claude Code session. Files routine postcards into TODO.md and surfaces urgent ones back to the main agent as a summary. Invoke when the main agent is told there is pending mail.
dnp-tdd-developer-hard
🔬 Deep TDD for complex .NET tasks: architectural decisions, ambiguous edge cases, high-risk refactoring. Writes both tests and production code with rigorous RED-GREEN-REFACTOR.
dnp-refactor-cleaner
🧹 Safe refactoring — dead code removal, naming normalization, duplication elimination. Never changes behavior; every cleanup step verified by test suite.