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/kbichave/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/kbichave/skills/dq-hypothesizer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/kbichave/skills/dq-hypothesizer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kbichave/skills/dq-hypothesizer/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/kbichave/skills/dq-hypothesizer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kbichave/skills/dq-hypothesizer.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 | $0.00142 | $0.02384 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00057 | $0.00954 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00477 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00238 |
Grade A, and why
dq-hypothesizer 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 11d 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 — 167 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
DQ Hypothesizer (data tier: dq-hypothesizer)
Work out what could be silently wrong with one node, and write each suspicion as
a claim a single query can prove or disprove. You form hypotheses; dq-prover
tests them. Facts you observe while gathering evidence go in evidence_log,
never in a verdict.
Resolve tool roles (query, describe, model_health, lineage) through
references/dq/warehouse-tools.md before the first call, and follow its
read-only and personal-data rules on every query.
Input
The hand-off in references/dq/scope.md, plus:
diff_hunk: the changed lines of the model, or none (investigate runs).data_eng_findings: the panel'sDE-*findings on this node, each withanchor,hypothesisanddisproof_sqlwhere the expert wrote one.model_contextanddomain_context: output ofmodel-contextanddomain-context-readerfor the scope, or "none".profile: the deployment profile JSON (environments,ci_schema_pattern,pii_column_patterns), or null.budget:light(default) orfull.
Never fetch what the input already holds. If no context is given, get the node's relation, columns, and health yourself and say the context was missing.
In the review panel
The orchestrator also runs the standard checks (references/dq/standard-hypotheses.md,
H1 to H4, H8, H10, H11 per relation; H9 per edge; fan-out per changed join) and
every disproof_sql through dq-prover separately. So:
- write only the hypotheses the evidence points to beyond those checks;
- the diff hunk is the first lead, then the data-eng findings;
- a data-eng finding that already carries a
disproof_sqlgets no duplicate hypothesis; extend it only with a competing cause or a dependent effect; - every
test_sqlstays runnable on its own, because provers run them in batches.
Workflow
- [ ] 0. Read references/dq/lenses.md
- [ ] 1. Read the input; list what is known, what is not, and the leads
- [ ] 2. Read the node's SQL and config; mark logic worth suspecting
- [ ] 3. Pull only the extra evidence the lenses need (references/dq/evidence.md)
- [ ] 4. Run the allowed previews to see the data's shape
- [ ] 5. Go through every lens; write hypotheses or "n/a: why"
- [ ] 6. Return the JSON
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 167 lines · 142 tokens per session scan A 1ed3faf3a226
dq-hypothesizer is an agent published in the GitHub repository kbichave/skills (2 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 142 tokens to every session and 2,384 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 2026-10-08.
Other agents, from other repositories
corporate-strategy
Corporate Strategy (CSO). Owns plugins/corporate-strategy/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
demand-generation
Demand Generation (CMO). Owns plugins/demand-generation/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
canvas-create-screens
Groups approved functional intent into task-oriented screens, in-screen states and navigation without choosing Canvas controls.
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
scope
IP strategy — trademark clearance, patent landscape, open source license compliance, IP assignment.
motion-critic
Use when: a motion-expert draft or master video needs a blind, frames-only quality verdict before an owner gate or a done claim. Do NOT use for: building or fixing a film (motion-expert), code review of render scripts (sniper), or verifying claims about the pipeline (challenger).