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 aiya000/dotfiles --skill write-tech-notegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aiya000/dotfilesWrote 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/aiya000/dotfiles/write-tech-note)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aiya000/dotfiles/write-tech-note"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aiya000/dotfiles/write-tech-note/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/aiya000/dotfiles/write-tech-note"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aiya000/dotfiles/write-tech-note.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 | $0.00069 | $0.06485 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.02594 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.01297 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00649 |
Grade A, and why
write-tech-note scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 29d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- screenshots that already live in the tool's public repository (a README's `docs/screenshots/`) are embedded by `https://raw.githubusercontent.com/<owner>/<repo>/<default branch>/<path>` when the user agrees, so nothing How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
write-tech-note
Write a technical article that reads as if aiya000 wrote it, for Zenn or Qiita.
Which of the two is decided from the current directory, not by a default — see references/platforms.md and Workflow 3. The platform then decides the output path, the file format, the title limit, the notation, and part of the self-review, so resolve it before drafting.
The style is defined in three reference files. Read all three before writing a single line:
references/style-guide.md— voice, formatting habits, strengths to copy, AI-isms to avoid, consistency rulesreferences/article-patterns.md— five article skeletons (A: Tips, B: deep-dive, C: library intro, D: guideline, E: opinion) and how to pick onereferences/platforms.md— how to tell Zenn from Qiita by the current directory, and every difference that follows from it
A fourth file, references/review-log.md, records every review an article written with this skill has received (Zenn's AI review, human comments, the user's own edits) and which rule each praised or criticised point maps to. Read it when writing the same pattern as a logged article. It is maintained by the refine-write-tech-note skill; do not edit it from here.
Hard requirements
These override everything else, including any persona defined in CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md.
-
No Claude Code character voice. The persona in the global
CLAUDE.md(「わたし」「あいやくん」「〜なのです」「〜ますです」「♪」「〜ですです」「〜かなって」) is for conversation with the user only. Not one of those tokens may appear in the article. The article imitates the user's articles, not the assistant. -
Consistency inside the article. Decide before writing, and keep to the end:
- first person: 僕 / 筆者 / 私 (one only)
- base register: です・ます / だ・である (one only; casual one-liners are the only exception and are counted)
- how claims are made: 断定＋理由 or 発見の実況 (one only; do not start confident and end hedged, or the reverse)
- platform syntax: Zenn or Qiita (one only; resolved in Workflow 3, never mixed —
references/platforms.md§3) - marker pairs for bad/good examples, the word for asides (余談 / おまけ / 蛇足), the reader address (あなた / 皆さん)
What ships with it
4 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.
- 29d ago Changed · +9 lines 9fbcb8ef5982
- 1mo ago Changed · +3 lines fd655e2380f1
- 1mo ago Changed · -5 lines · +9 tokens per session 46896879c9b3
- 1mo ago First seen · 121 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A cca9f99b74b5
write-tech-note is a skill published in the GitHub repository aiya000/dotfiles (21 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 6,485 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-07.
Other skills, from other repositories
restart__pull_request
A pull-request restart workflow for replacing a messy review with a new pull request containing one clean commit and a summary of the earlier discussion.
rescue__pull_request_review
An automated workflow for handling GitHub pull-request review comments, applying requested code changes, committing them, and pushing them back.
submit__pull_request
An automated pull-request submission workflow. A pull request is a request for a code change to be reviewed and merged; this workflow writes its explanation, creates it, watches its automated checks, and fixes failed checks.
write__pull_request
A workflow for writing a pull request description, the explanation attached to a proposed code change for review. It analyses the changes and commit history.
monitor__ci_status
An automated monitor for GitHub Actions, the service that runs checks such as tests after code changes. It watches all checks after a pull request or a push to a pull-request branch and can invoke a failure-recovery process.
monitor__pull_request_conflict
An automated check for GitHub pull requests, which are proposed code changes awaiting review or merging.