Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AgentToolkit/altk-evolvenpx agentmods add skills/agenttoolkit/altk-evolve/agent-wiki-compare-outcomesWrote 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/agenttoolkit/altk-evolve/agent-wiki-compare-outcomes)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/agenttoolkit/altk-evolve/agent-wiki-compare-outcomes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agenttoolkit/altk-evolve/agent-wiki-compare-outcomes/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/agenttoolkit/altk-evolve/agent-wiki-compare-outcomes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agenttoolkit/altk-evolve/agent-wiki-compare-outcomes.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 | $0.00064 | $0.01362 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00545 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00272 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00136 |
Grade A, and why
agent-wiki-compare-outcomes 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 25d 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 — 135 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agent Wiki — Compare Outcomes
Overview
Use this pass after summarize/extract/synthesize when there are multiple trajectories that can be judged as successful or failed. It can judge outcomes with an LLM from the normalized transcript, so it does not need to depend on benchmark-specific success/failure labels. It derives contrastive guidelines: rules that are supported by a failed path, a successful path, and concrete evidence from task wording, tool/API documentation, tool/API calls, transcript evidence, optional failure snippets, and optionally an LLM success/failure judgment.
This pass exists to avoid hand-authored domain knowledge. Do not write a rule just because you know the benchmark or application. Write a rule only when the input trajectories contain the evidence.
Workflow
Step 1: Build an Evidence Pack
Run the bundled script over normalized trajectory JSON files:
uv run python explorations/agent-wiki/skills/agent-wiki-compare-outcomes/scripts/compare_outcomes.py \
--input <normalized-dir-or-json> \
--out-json <analysis.json> \
--out-md <analysis.md> \
--judge-outcomes always
Pass --input multiple times to compare several experiment arms.
The script groups traces by metadata.task_id when present; otherwise it uses
a normalized task request. For each group it compares successful and failed
runs, then extracts:
- task request text;
- stored outcome and failure snippets when present;
- LLM-judged outcome when
--judge-outcomes missingor--judge-outcomes alwaysis set; - observed tool/API calls from
stats.top_tools, code snippets, and sourceapi_calls.jsonlwhen available; - tool/API descriptions shown in the trajectory transcript.
Judging modes:
--judge-outcomes never: use only storedoutcome.success.--judge-outcomes missing: judge only traces without stored outcomes.--judge-outcomes always: ignore stored success labels and use the LLM judgment for all traces.
Prefer --judge-outcomes always when the available stored labels come from a
benchmark evaluator or another dataset-specific schema. Use stored outcomes
only when they are trusted, dataset-neutral annotations you are comfortable
using as ground truth.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 25d ago First seen · 135 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A 93894472b8c6
agent-wiki-compare-outcomes is a skill published in the GitHub repository AgentToolkit/altk-evolve (124 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 1,362 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-22.
Other skills, from other repositories
memory-to-skill
Turn workflows from your MemSearch memory into reusable skills. Use when the user asks to make/create/extract/distill a skill from what they just did or from past work, review skill candidates, install a distilled skill, or 'turn this into a skill'. Manages MemSearch procedural-memory candidates under…
media-gen
Photoreal image + video generation and upscaling via fal.ai (pay-per-use, one API key, always-current models: Kling, Seedance, FLUX, nano-banana Pro, Topaz). Use for image-to-video ("animate this image", "turn this photo into a video"), photoreal video clips for websites/demos, hero video loops, upscaling…
research-notebook
Deep research on any topic via the NotebookLM CLI. Use whenever the user requests research on a topic, in any project, in any language. Triggers on phrases like "research this", "deep dive on", "do research on", "dig into", "find out about", "investigate", "look into", "research X for me". Creates or reuses a…
learn
Use when the user shares a conclusion, note, or takeaway from something they're studying — a book, course, or article — and wants it captured into their personal learning archive. Trigger phrases include "what I learned today", "notes from the book", "conclusions from chapter X", plus the explicit /learn command. Also…
knowledge-pack
Build a durable knowledge pack in the hub for one subject — a small always-read index plus numbered load-on-demand files, every claim sourced and graded. Use when the user says "build a knowledge pack", "make a reference on X", or when you notice you keep re-deriving or re-researching the same subject across sessions.
wiki-article
Write a wiki article capturing structure you learned about an active project in the user's hub. Use when you grepped or spawned Explore agents to understand a project and must record that knowledge before /done, or when the user asks to "write a wiki article", "document this in the wiki", or "add this to the wiki".