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/cekura-ai/cekura-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/cekura-ai/cekura-skills/cekura-report)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cekura-ai/cekura-skills/cekura-report"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cekura-ai/cekura-skills/cekura-report/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/cekura-ai/cekura-skills/cekura-report"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cekura-ai/cekura-skills/cekura-report.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 | $0.00031 | $0.05356 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.02678 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.01071 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00536 |
Grade A, and why
cekura-report 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 3d 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 — 373 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tracking (do this first)
Before doing anything else, call mcp__cekura__cekura_skill_started with
skill_name="cekura-report". If a conversation/session ID is available (e.g. you
were invoked from Cekura sandbox), also pass it as conversation_id. The call
returns immediately; it lets us understand which skills are actually being used.
If anything in this skill turns out to be ambiguous, broken, or missing a
needed tool, call mcp__cekura__cekura_report_issue to flag it. Use this
LIBERALLY — even severity="low" reports are valuable feedback.
/cekura-report
Build a full agent quality report from scratch: confirm target → validate config → generate evals → configure mock data → run → analyze → write report.
Step 1 — Confirm what to test
Use AskUserQuestion to collect:
- Agent ID on Cekura (numeric, e.g.
12345). If unknown, usemcp__cekura__aiagents_listto help find it. - (Optional) Project ID, if the user manages multiple projects.
- (Optional) Domain / product context — useful for generating realistic evaluators.
Do NOT ask for connection mode here. Connection mode is collected later, right before the run (Step 4).
If the user wants to create an agent first
If the user's intent is "I want to create an agent" / "set up a new agent" / "I don't have an agent yet" — do not proceed with this report flow. Delegate to the cekura:cekura-create-agent skill via Skill and resume here once they have an agent ID.
Do not proceed until the agent ID is confirmed.
Step 2 — Validate the agent
Call mcp__cekura__aiagents_retrieve with the supplied id. Check:
agent_descriptionis present and substantive — at least 2 sentences covering what the agent does, who it serves, and the workflows it supports. Empty or placeholder descriptions produce generic, low-quality evaluators.- Knowledge base / dynamic variables, if present, match the user's stated domain.
- Provider — note which provider the agent is configured with (VAPI, Retell, ElevenLabs, LiveKit, Pipecat, websocket, SIP, text). You'll need this in Step 3 to decide the mock-data options and in Step 4 to pick the run tool.
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.
- 3d ago Changed · +3 lines 406ce8c3bb8c
- 12d ago First seen · 370 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 7ef3c12f031f
cekura-report is a command published in the GitHub repository cekura-ai/cekura-skills (7 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 5,356 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 commands, from other repositories
prototype
You are building a proof-of-concept for the current Grainulator sprint. Read CLAUDE.md for sprint context and claims.json for existing research claims.
qa-changes
This skill should be used when the user asks to "QA a pull request", "test PR changes", "verify a PR works", "functionally test changes", or when an automated workflow triggers QA validation of code changes. Provides a structured methodology for setting up the environment, exercising changed behavior, and reporting…
verify
Run repository verification using the verification-loop skill.
test-coverage
Analyze test coverage and identify the highest-value gaps to fill.
tdd
A command that follows test-driven development (TDD), a method where you write tests before the code they check. It moves through writing a failing test, adding the smallest implementation, and then improving the code.
check-dev
Type-check a Z specification with fuzz.