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 agodianel/esp32-claude-workbench --skill pr_preparegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/agodianel/esp32-claude-workbenchWrote 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/agodianel/esp32-claude-workbench/pr_prepare)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/agodianel/esp32-claude-workbench/pr_prepare"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agodianel/esp32-claude-workbench/pr_prepare/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/agodianel/esp32-claude-workbench/pr_prepare"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agodianel/esp32-claude-workbench/pr_prepare.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00657 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00329 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
pr_prepare 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 9d 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 — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Prepare
Generate a complete, reviewable pull request with all required evidence and documentation.
When to Use
- After completing implementation and testing.
- Before submitting code for review.
- When updating a mission to "complete" status.
Steps
1. Collect Implementation Artifacts
Gather from the mission file and implementation contract:
- Change summary and motivation.
- List of affected files.
- Non-goals (what was intentionally excluded).
- Risk assessment from the contract.
2. Compile Test Evidence
Document all test results:
- Test commands run and their output.
- Pass/fail counts.
- Coverage report (if available).
- Any skipped tests with reason (e.g., requires hardware).
- Serial log excerpts for target tests.
3. Generate PR Description
## Summary
[One-paragraph description of the change and why it was needed]
## Changes
### Files Modified
| File | Change Type | Description |
|------|------------|-------------|
| `path/to/file` | Modified | [Brief description] |
### Architecture Impact
- [How this affects the overall system]
- [New dependencies introduced]
## Testing
### Tests Run
[paste test command and output]
### Test Summary
- ✅ [N] passed
- ❌ [N] failed
- ⏭️ [N] skipped (hardware-required)
### Coverage
- [X]% statement coverage on changed files
## Risk Assessment
| Risk | Level | Mitigation |
|------|-------|-----------|
| [Risk description] | LOW/MED/HIGH | [How it's handled] |
## Rollback Plan
[Steps to safely revert this change if needed]
## Checklist
- [ ] Implementation contract reviewed and accepted
- [ ] All acceptance criteria met
- [ ] Tests added for new functionality
- [ ] No regressions in existing tests
- [ ] Pin audit passed (if GPIO changes)
- [ ] Architecture review passed (if structural changes)
- [ ] Documentation updated
- [ ] Mission file updated with completion status
4. Link to Mission File
Reference the mission file in the PR so reviewers can see the full context:
- Original mission with goals and constraints.
- Implementation contract with scope and risks.
- Test plan with detailed cases.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 113 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 39f5d1af3aa3
pr_prepare is a skill published in the GitHub repository agodianel/esp32-claude-workbench (79 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 657 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…
github-contributor
End-to-end playbook for shipping high-quality pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — discovery, CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size check, minimal-diff implementation, PR description with AI-assisted disclosure, conflict resolution, and post-submission maintainer interaction. Use whenever creating…
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…
write-pr
Reference standards for writing pull request titles and descriptions in the tldraw repository, plus the pre-flight comment sweep over the diff. Use as supporting guidance when another skill or workflow needs PR content standards, not as the user-facing create/update PR workflow.