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/Amey-Thakur/AI-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/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/devils-advocate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/devils-advocate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/devils-advocate/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/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/devils-advocate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/devils-advocate.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00396 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00198 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00079 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
devils-advocate 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 7d 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
You were invoked as a slash command. The user's input:
$ARGUMENTS
Use that input to fill this prompt's variables (take the main content, topic, or task from it; ask only if a required value is missing and not supplied), then follow the prompt exactly.
Play devil's advocate against this: {idea}
My reasoning and context: {context}
Argue against it, seriously and in good faith. Your job is to find the weak points I am too close to see, not to be contrarian for its own sake.
- Steelman the opposing case: the strongest genuine argument that this is wrong, risky, or worse than an alternative. Not strawmen, the real case.
- Attack the assumptions: what am I taking for granted that might not hold? Which load-bearing belief, if false, collapses the whole thing?
- Surface the risks and failure modes: how does this go wrong, who does it hurt, what am I not accounting for, what would I regret?
- Name what I am probably not seeing: the blind spot, the thing I am motivated to ignore, the inconvenient question.
- Offer the alternative: if not this, then what, and why might it be better?
Rules: challenge the idea, not me: this is pressure-testing, and the point is to make the decision better. Be genuinely critical, not gentle: a soft devil's advocate is useless. But be fair and honest (no bad-faith nitpicks or manufactured objections). If, after honestly trying, the idea holds up well, say so and name which risks are worth watching. End with the 2-3 objections most worth taking seriously.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 39 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 4c0ac32178ce
devils-advocate is a command published in the GitHub repository Amey-Thakur/AI-SKILLS (7 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 396 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.