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 alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins --skill carbon-accounting-automationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-pluginsWrote 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/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/carbon-accounting-automation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/carbon-accounting-automation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/carbon-accounting-automation/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/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/carbon-accounting-automation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/carbon-accounting-automation.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 | $0.00028 | $0.00783 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00313 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
carbon-accounting-automation 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 23d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- carbon-accounting-automation — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 49 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You have deep expertise in corporate carbon accounting per the GHG Protocol. When the user is working on ESG sustainability tasks involving emissions data, apply this knowledge automatically.
Core competencies
GHG Protocol fundamentals:
- Scope 1 — direct emissions from owned/controlled sources (stationary combustion, mobile combustion, process emissions, fugitive emissions)
- Scope 2 — indirect emissions from purchased energy. Always report BOTH location-based (grid average) AND market-based (contractual instruments like RECs/GOs) per the Scope 2 Guidance (2015)
- Scope 3 — 15 categories across upstream (1–8: purchased goods, capital goods, fuel & energy, upstream transport, waste, business travel, employee commuting, upstream leased) and downstream (9–15: downstream transport, processing, use of sold products, end-of-life, downstream leased, franchises, investments)
Boundaries and consolidation:
- Operational control vs financial control vs equity share — choose one and apply consistently
- Document the organizational boundary; note acquisitions, divestitures, and structural changes that trigger baseline recalculation per the GHG Protocol's recalculation policy (>5% threshold typical)
Calculation methods:
- Activity data × emission factor (Tier 1) — most common for Scope 1 stationary combustion using DEFRA, EPA, or IEA factors
- Direct measurement (Tier 3) — for refineries, cement, steel where CEMS data exists
- Spend-based vs activity-based for Scope 3 — spend-based is acceptable for early inventories but activity-based / supplier-specific is required for credible decarbonization tracking
- Use the latest GWP values (currently AR6, GWP100) unless reporting under a regime that specifies an earlier set (some regimes still cite AR5)
Data quality:
- Pedigree matrix (activity-data quality, emission-factor representativeness, geographic specificity, technological specificity, temporal alignment)
- Flag missing categories, especially Scope 3 categories 1, 11, and 15 (often material)
- Note assurance status — limited assurance is the floor for CSRD; reasonable assurance phasing in
Targets:
- SBTi pathways — 1.5°C aligned (most stringent), well-below-2°C, and FLAG (Forest, Land, and Agriculture) sector
- Near-term (5–10y) vs long-term (2050 net-zero) targets — net-zero requires 90%+ absolute reduction with limited residual offsets
- Distinguish absolute reduction targets from intensity targets
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.
- 23d ago First seen · 49 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A ec9c44c6e758
carbon-accounting-automation is a skill published in the GitHub repository alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins (30 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 783 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 2026-09-24.
Other skills, from other repositories
scholarly-writing-refiner
Polishes academic English paragraph by paragraph, reviewing grammar, word choice, voice, coherence, and sentence structure. Outputs revision suggestions alongside polished text. Triggered by phrases like 'polish this paragraph,' 'check the grammar,' 'rewrite in academic English,' or keywords like manuscript editing…
arxiv-mcp-server
Use when finding, comparing, reading, or monitoring arXiv papers, including requests for abstracts, citation graphs, original LaTeX, section-level technical details, or literature reviews.
mathesis
Mathematical thinking as a craft and generative discipline, not computation or proof-checking. Deploy when a mathematical object or question is present and the user wants to understand rather than merely solve. Use for: seeing into a theorem rather than verifying it; choosing the right definition before the proof…
paper-algorithm-jazz
Improvisational engagement with mathematical and formal content of scientific papers. Riff on equations, interpret algorithms, explore parameter spaces.
paper-hermeneutics
Deep, multi-layered analysis of scientific papers and technical documents. Stratified readings from plain-language summary through technical breakdown to critical synthesis.
counter-experiment
Design the experiments that would break or confirm a claim. Not critique (what's wrong) but generative opposition (what would you need to see). Given any empirical claim, hypothesis, or finding, generate 3-5 specific, feasible experiments that would distinguish between the proposed interpretation and simpler…