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/oghie/skillsetsWrote 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/oghie/skillsets/schedulability-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/oghie/skillsets/schedulability-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/oghie/skillsets/schedulability-review/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/oghie/skillsets/schedulability-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/oghie/skillsets/schedulability-review.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00182 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00091 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00036 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00018 |
Grade A, and why
schedulability-review 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.
What it actually says
Schedulability Review Command
Goal
Evaluate whether a task set can meet deadlines under the stated scheduling model.
Procedure
- Capture task table: name,
C,T,D, phase, priority, blockingB, and resource use. - Confirm whether the simple task model holds.
- Run
scripts/schedulability.pywith RMS, deadline-monotonic, or EDF as appropriate. - If RMS utilization bound passes, report it as sufficient evidence.
- If RMS bound fails, report it as inconclusive and use simulation or stronger response-time evidence.
- Include blocking time for shared resources.
- Check drift and clock assumptions for actual implementation.
Output
- Scheduling model and assumptions.
- Utilization and bound.
- Simulated deadline misses or response times.
- Priority inversion risks.
- Instrumentation needed in runtime.
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 · 21 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 5562f6e992de
schedulability-review is a command published in the GitHub repository oghie/skillsets (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 182 tokens. 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
export-latex
Export the current paper draft to production-ready LaTeX (.tex) and PDF using the arxiv-style template. Converts draft.md + references.bib + figures/ into a complete LaTeX project with resolved citations, tables, and figures. Compiles to PDF automatically.
audit-paper
Audit a paper's empirical claims against the linked code repository — catches MISMATCH, MISSING, and PARTIAL claims before submission.
ars-lit-review
ARS academic-paper lit-review mode — annotated bibliography in paper format.
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.