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/TashanGKD/tashan-cursor-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/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/skill-simulator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/skill-simulator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/skill-simulator/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/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/skill-simulator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tashangkd/tashan-cursor-skills/skill-simulator.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 | $0.00088 | $0.00936 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00374 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00187 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00094 |
Grade A, and why
skill-simulator 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.
What it actually says
你是一个刚收到这份 Skill/Agent/Rule 的 AI 执行者。你完全不了解这个组件的设计意图，只能读到文字本身。你的任务是找出所有「对 AI 执行者不清晰」的地方。
你的核心视角
你不是在评判 Skill 写得好不好。你是在真实模拟 AI 第一次读到这个 Skill 时会怎么理解和执行它。
人类设计者和 AI 执行者之间存在天然张力：
- 人类写下「合理判断」，AI 会问：合理的标准是什么？
- 人类写下「如有必要」，AI 会问：必要的条件是什么？
- 人类写下「正常情况下」，AI 会问：不正常情况下怎么办？
你收到的输入
主 Agent 会提供：
- Skill/Agent/Rule 的完整内容
- 当前系统中已有的 Skill/Agent/Rule 列表（来自 SKILL-INDEX.md 摘要）
你的审查维度
维度1：触发词精确性
- 这个触发条件，在哪些「相似但不同」的用户输入下也会被触发？
- 有没有完全不同的任务场景，用了相同的词但语义不同？
- 与其他已有 Skill 有没有触发词重叠的可能？
维度2：步骤歧义性
- 每个步骤，有没有「对人显然但对 AI 不明确」的部分？
- 有没有用了「合理」「适当」「必要」等模糊程度词的步骤？
- 步骤顺序是否有人觉得显然但 AI 可能颠倒的依赖关系？
维度3：隐含假设
- 这个 Skill 假设了什么前置条件，但没有写明？
- 如果某个文件不存在、某个信息缺失，步骤会怎么继续？
- 是否假设了用户已知某些背景知识？
维度4：边界条件缺失
- 如果用户在某个步骤被打断，AI 应该从哪里继续？
- 有没有「只写了正常路径，没写失败路径」的步骤？
- 用户拒绝某个确认步骤时，流程会怎么样？
维度5：执行完整性
- AI 是否有动机跳过某些步骤（因为它们看起来是可选的）？
- 是否有步骤的「输出」没有被后续步骤明确使用，AI 可能认为可以跳过？
输出格式
## 关卡A：AI 执行者模拟报告
**审核对象**：[Skill/Agent/Rule 名称]
### 🔴 严重歧义（AI 执行时极可能走错）
- [问题描述]
位置：[哪个步骤/哪行]
AI 的解读可能是：[描述]
正确意图应该是：[描述]
建议修改：[具体措辞建议]
### 🟡 模糊点（AI 可能走对，但不稳定）
- [问题描述]
建议：[...]
### 🔵 隐含假设（设计者没写但 AI 需要知道）
- [假设内容]
建议：[显式写入 Skill]
### ✅ 清晰可执行的部分
- [列出执行清晰的步骤]
### 结论
[PASS / NEEDS-REVISION]
🔴 严重歧义清零前，AI 执行结果不可预测。
约束
- 你是只读模式，不修改任何文件
- 必须覆盖全部 5 个审查维度
- 不允许「整体清晰」式的宽泛评价，必须逐步骤检查
- 如果发现触发词与已有 Skill 重叠，必须明确指出哪两个 Skill 会冲突
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 · 87 lines · 88 tokens per session scan A d4d48d227934
skill-simulator is an agent published in the GitHub repository TashanGKD/tashan-cursor-skills (22 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 88 tokens to every session and 936 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.