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 0xMassi/claude-skills --skill go-strictgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/0xMassi/claude-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/skills/0xmassi/claude-skills/go-strict)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/0xmassi/claude-skills/go-strict"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0xmassi/claude-skills/go-strict/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/0xmassi/claude-skills/go-strict"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/0xmassi/claude-skills/go-strict.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 | $0.00082 | $0.03474 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00041 | $0.01737 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00695 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00347 |
Grade A, and why
go-strict 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 — 490 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Go Strict Standard
Rules extracted from 2 production Go services.
CRITICAL: Error Handling
GO-01: Always wrap errors with context
// BAD: no context, impossible to trace
if err != nil {
return err
}
// GOOD: fmt.Errorf with %w for wrapping
store, err := createStore(path)
if err != nil {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("create store: %w", err)
}
// GOOD: multiple levels of context
session, err := validateToken(token)
if err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("validate session for user %s: %w", userID, err)
}
GO-02: Check errors immediately, never defer
// BAD: error ignored
json.Unmarshal(data, &result)
// GOOD
if err := json.Unmarshal(data, &result); err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("unmarshal response: %w", err)
}
GO-03: Drain response bodies for connection reuse
resp, err := http.Get(url)
if err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("request failed: %w", err)
}
defer resp.Body.Close()
if resp.StatusCode != http.StatusOK {
io.Copy(io.Discard, resp.Body) // DRAIN before closing
return fmt.Errorf("unexpected status: %d", resp.StatusCode)
}
GO-04: Typed errors for API responses
type APIError struct {
Status int `json:"status"`
Message string `json:"message"`
Code string `json:"code,omitempty"`
}
func (e *APIError) Error() string {
return fmt.Sprintf("[%d] %s", e.Status, e.Message)
}
func SendError(c *gin.Context, status int, message string) {
c.JSON(status, APIError{Status: status, Message: message})
}
CRITICAL: Package Organization
GO-05: internal/ for private, pkg/ for reusable
project/
├── cmd/
│ └── server/
│ └── main.go # Entry point only: no logic
├── internal/
│ ├── handlers/ # HTTP handlers (Gin)
│ ├── middleware/ # Auth, rate limit, CORS, validation
│ ├── services/ # Business logic
│ ├── models/ # Data structures
│ ├── config/ # Env var loading
│ └── utils/ # Helpers
├── pkg/
│ ├── redis/ # Reusable Redis client
│ └── sqlite/ # Reusable SQLite wrapper
├── go.mod
└── go.sum
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 · 490 lines · 82 tokens per session scan A b1d12dad1d2a
go-strict is a skill published in the GitHub repository 0xMassi/claude-skills (7 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 82 tokens to every session and 3,474 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 skills, from other repositories
go-code-reviewer
Review Go code with a defect-first approach using repository policy (constitution.md first, then AGENTS.md fallback). Use for code review, PR review, quality checks, risk analysis, and regression detection.
go-review-lead
Orchestrate a comprehensive Go code review by triaging code changes, dispatching vertical review skills (security, concurrency, error, logic, performance, quality, test, observability) as parallel agents, then consolidating results into a unified report. Use for full Go PR review or comprehensive code review. Replaces…
go-concurrency-review
Review Go code for concurrency safety and goroutine lifecycle issues including race conditions, deadlocks, goroutine leaks, mutex misuse, and context propagation. Trigger when code contains go func, channels, sync primitives, WaitGroup, errgroup, or goroutine lifecycle management. Use for concurrency-focused review of…
go-error-review
Review Go code for error handling correctness, nil safety, and failure-path integrity including ignored errors, missing wrapping, panic misuse, SQL/HTTP resource lifecycle, and transaction patterns. Trigger when code contains error returns, panic calls, sql.Rows, transactions, HTTP client/server code, or nil-sensitive…
go-performance-review
Review Go code for performance issues including slice/map pre-allocation, string concatenation, N+1 queries, connection pool configuration, sync.Pool, memory alignment, lock scope, buffered I/O, and HTTP transport tuning. Trigger when code contains make(), loops, database queries, string building, sync primitives…
go-quality-review
Review Go code for code quality, style, and modern Go practices including function length, nesting depth, naming, mutable globals, interface design, receiver consistency, modern Go idioms (slog, generics, typed atomics), and static analysis. Trigger when reviewing Go code structure, readability, or maintainability.…