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.
npx skills add 001TMF/blatant-why --skill by-hypothesis-debategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/001TMF/blatant-whyWrote 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/skills/001tmf/blatant-why/by-hypothesis-debate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/001tmf/blatant-why/by-hypothesis-debate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/001tmf/blatant-why/by-hypothesis-debate/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/skills/001tmf/blatant-why/by-hypothesis-debate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/001tmf/blatant-why/by-hypothesis-debate.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 433 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00006 | $0.06542 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.03271 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.01308 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00654 |
Grade A, and why
by-hypothesis-debate 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 — 510 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
BY Hypothesis-Debate Skill
Picking the wrong design strategy on a novel target wastes a GPU day. This skill forces an explicit, structured debate before any compute is spent: three hypothesis agents propose competing strategies in parallel, then a reflection agent ranks them against a fixed rubric. The winner becomes the campaign config.
The pattern is borrowed from adversarial ML and red-team review — it works because three independently-constrained agents will surface failure modes that a single planner misses, and the reflection step exposes hidden assumptions that would otherwise propagate into the campaign plan.
When to Use This Skill
✅ Use this skill when:
- Starting a campaign against a novel target (0–1 PDB structures, no SAbDab antibodies, <10 papers)
- Research findings have
CONTRADICTEDconfidence (sources disagree on epitope, modality, or scaffold) - Multiple viable modalities are on the table (VHH vs scFv vs de novo binder) and the user has not pinned one
- The user explicitly says "compare approaches", "explore options", "which strategy would you pick"
- Target difficulty is rated
novelorexploratorybyby-research - A previous campaign against the same target failed with hit rate < 5% (this skill helps replan, not retry)
❌ Do NOT use this skill when:
- Target is well-studied with a clear precedent (e.g., TNF-alpha, PD-L1, HER2) → use
by-campaign-managerdirectly - The user has already specified modality, scaffolds, and tier — debating wastes turns
- Running a preview / feasibility campaign — overhead of 3-agent debate is not worth it for 5–10 designs
- Iterating on a previously-approved campaign (round 2, 3, … reuse the prior strategy)
- The campaign is gated on lab submission — debate occurs upstream of
/by:approve-lab, not after
Quick Start
Invoke from the orchestrator (main session) after by-research has written
research.md and recommended_hotspots.json to the campaign directory:
What ships with it
6 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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 · 510 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A 28788afb464e
by-hypothesis-debate is a skill published in the GitHub repository 001TMF/blatant-why (114 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 6,542 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
statistical-modeling
Statistical modeling and machine learning for biomarker discovery, survival analysis, classification, regression, and model interpretation.
genomic-variants
Analysis of called genomic variants — filtering, annotation, GWAS, and population-genetics summaries from VCF and PLINK-format data.
bulk-transcriptomics
Bulk RNA-seq and microarray differential expression analysis including method selection, batch correction, and complex experimental designs.
chromatin-regulation
Chromatin regulation analysis from called peaks and count matrices — differential binding, signal summarisation, peak annotation, and scATAC-seq.
spatial-omics
Spatial transcriptomics and spatial proteomics analysis covering technology-specific workflows, spatial statistics, deconvolution, and niche analysis.
drug-repurposing
Systematic drug repurposing via signature matching, target-based analysis, network proximity, genetic evidence scoring, and clinical evidence mining.