Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to albiol2004/trio-agent-loop. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/albiol2004/trio-agent-loop/main/.agents/skills/trio/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/albiol2004/trio-agent-loopWrote 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/albiol2004/trio-agent-loop/trio)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/albiol2004/trio-agent-loop/trio"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/albiol2004/trio-agent-loop/trio/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/albiol2004/trio-agent-loop/trio"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/albiol2004/trio-agent-loop/trio.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 | $0.00036 | $0.03459 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.01384 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00692 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00346 |
Grade A, and why
trio 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 27d 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the orchestrator of a two-agent loop. You do no planning, implementing, or evaluating yourself — you sequence the two role agents, enforce stop conditions, and report to the human. One invocation of /trio = exactly one iteration. When the user asks to run/start/continue the trio loop in any phrasing (not a bare /trio), chain iterations end-to-end: reschedule promptly on ITERATE with no per-iteration checkpoint between Lead completion, the commit gate, Evaluator dispatch, and the next iteration — only SHIP/BLOCKED/NEEDS_HUMAN (or the iteration cap) stops the chain.
Mailbox directory: default loop/. If invoked with dir=<path> (e.g. /trio dir=loop-authz), that directory is the mailbox — every loop/ reference below means it, and every role prompt you write MUST name it as an absolute path (fresh-context agents have no other way to find it).
0. Preflight — decide whether to run at all
- Read
loop/STATE.md. If it does not exist, tell the user to run/trio-init <goal>first and STOP (if running under /loop, end the loop by not rescheduling).- Collision check: if STATE.md has a
mission:line, verify it still matches GOAL.md's mission sentence, and verify LOG.md's tail is consistent with the iterations you've been orchestrating. A mismatch means another session has repurposed this mailbox mid-loop: STOP immediately, do not write anything, and tell the human — the fix is separate mailbox dirs (/trio-init dir=loop-<name> …), never sharing one.
- Collision check: if STATE.md has a
- Read
loop/VERDICT.mdif it exists — its first line is machine-readable (VERDICT: SHIP|ITERATE|NEEDS_HUMAN|BLOCKED, with an optionalscope=designorscope=local:<paths>suffix on ITERATE); trust that line, not your reading of the prose. Apply stop conditions before doing any work:- Last verdict
SHIP→ announce completion (quote the Evaluator's retirement commit sha(s) fromloop/VERDICT.md'scommit:lines and follow-ups), end the loop. - Last verdict
BLOCKED→ surface the Evaluator's "what the human must decide" section to the user, end the loop. - Last verdict
NEEDS_HUMAN→ surface the Evaluator's## Human checksection to the user with its exact steps; the loop pauses until the human confirms or redirects. Do not start another iteration in the same turn. iteration >= max_iterationsin STATE.md → stop, summarize LOG.md, tell the user how to raise the cap in STATE.md and resume.- Plateau check: research shows iterate-loop gains flatten after ~3 iterations. From iteration 4 on, if the last verdict's "what changed" section shows the same checks still failing, treat it as BLOCKED (stuck) rather than starting another iteration.
- Last verdict
- Otherwise increment
iterationin STATE.md, setstatus: running, and proceed.
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.
- 27d ago Changed · +5 lines e217936a37d1
- 29d ago Changed · +6 lines 9e0c0f80a53d
- 1mo ago Changed · +6 lines e46e5a4904f3
- 2mo ago First seen · 59 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A f44b07a466a6
trio is a skill published in the GitHub repository albiol2004/trio-agent-loop (2 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 3,459 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
lean-ctx-review
Review how the lean-ctx ctx MCP tools performed in the current session and file upstream issues for confirmed problems. Use when the user asks to review/audit lean-ctx tool performance, says "lean-ctx review", asks why ctx tools failed or fell back to native tools, or wants to report a lean-ctx bug.
crit-cli
Use when an agent needs to author or reply to crit inline comments programmatically (including multi-agent workflows commenting on shared code/plans/docs/proposals), publish or unpublish a crit review with crit share, sync a crit review to or from a GitHub PR or GitLab MR, or read/interpret a crit review JSON file.…
crit
Review code changes, a plan, a live page (running dev server), or a local HTML file with Crit inline comments and structured human feedback. Use only when the user explicitly invokes /crit or directly asks to use Crit; a generic review request does not count.
crit-story
Author a crit story and continue the interactive review loop only when the user explicitly invokes crit-story or directly asks you to generate a crit story. Do not infer this skill from generic review, PR, or diff-review requests.
socratic-code-theory-recovery
Recover the "theory" (Naur 1985) of an existing codebase through recursive question refinement before writing documentation. Use on brownfield projects where the spec is missing — produces a Question Tree separating what is answerable from code (with evidence) from what must be asked of the team (routed by role).…
arc42-documentation
Author an arc42 architecture document with the project's cross-section traceability rules. Use when producing or extending an arc42 document — it carries the procedure the "Architecture Documentation" contract deliberately leaves out: scaffolding the with-help template, the five traceability rules arc42 does not…