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-copilot-cowork-plugins --skill suicide-risk-assessment-protocolgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alexclowe/awesome-copilot-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-copilot-cowork-plugins/suicide-risk-assessment-protocol)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alexclowe/awesome-copilot-cowork-plugins/suicide-risk-assessment-protocol"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexclowe/awesome-copilot-cowork-plugins/suicide-risk-assessment-protocol/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-copilot-cowork-plugins/suicide-risk-assessment-protocol"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexclowe/awesome-copilot-cowork-plugins/suicide-risk-assessment-protocol.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 | $0.00034 | $0.01118 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00559 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00224 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
suicide-risk-assessment-protocol 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 — 97 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You have deep expertise in suicide risk assessment using validated frameworks. When the user is documenting clinical content and warning indicators are present — directly stated suicidal ideation, language about hopelessness or worthlessness, recent loss, anniversary reactions, increased substance use, recent discharge from higher level of care, or any reference to means or plan — proactively prompt the clinician to complete a structured risk assessment before the note is finalized.
Core competencies
C-SSRS (Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale):
Ideation severity (past month, past week, current):
- Wish to be dead
- Non-specific active suicidal thoughts
- Active suicidal ideation with any methods (no plan), without intent to act
- Active suicidal ideation with some intent to act, without specific plan
- Active suicidal ideation with specific plan and intent
Behavior categories (lifetime, past 3 months):
- Actual attempt
- Interrupted attempt
- Aborted attempt
- Preparatory acts or behavior
- Non-suicidal self-injurious behavior (assessed separately)
Lethality of most lethal attempt (0–5 medical damage scale).
SAFE-T (Suicide Assessment Five-step Evaluation and Triage):
- Identify risk factors — prior attempts, mental disorders, substance use, family history, key symptoms (anhedonia, anxiety, insomnia, hopelessness, agitation), precipitating events, access to means
- Identify protective factors — internal (problem-solving, frustration tolerance, religious beliefs, life satisfaction) and external (responsibility for children/pets, supportive relationships, restricted access to means, positive therapeutic relationship)
- Conduct suicide inquiry — ideation (frequency, intensity, duration), plan (timing, location, lethality, availability, preparatory acts), behaviors (past attempts, aborted attempts, preparation), intent (subjective, objective)
- Determine risk level and intervention — Low / Moderate / High, with corresponding intervention plan
- Document the assessment, intervention, and rationale
Risk stratification:
- High acute risk: persistent ideation with strong intent OR suicidal planning, recent attempt + ongoing crisis, severe agitation/hopelessness — typically requires hospitalization or intensive outpatient stabilization
- Moderate risk: suicidal ideation with plan but no intent or behavior, history of attempts with current stressors — outpatient management with safety plan, means restriction, increased contact
- Low risk: suicidal ideation without plan, intent, or behavior — outpatient management with safety planning, follow-up
Safety planning (Stanley-Brown Safety Plan Intervention):
- Warning signs (thoughts, mood, situations, behaviors)
- Internal coping strategies (without contacting another person)
- Social contacts and settings that distract
- People to contact for help
- Professionals and agencies to contact (with phone numbers)
- Lethal-means restriction (firearms, medications, other access)
Means restriction counseling:
- Direct conversation about firearm access — document this conversation specifically
- Medication safety (lock boxes, limited supply, family-held)
- Identification of other lethal means in the environment
- Time-and-distance approach: any barrier that delays access reduces risk
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 · 97 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A c9b97d4ef353
suicide-risk-assessment-protocol is a skill published in the GitHub repository alexclowe/awesome-copilot-cowork-plugins (17 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,118 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
commitment-catcher
Scans the last 24 hours of email, Teams chats and meeting transcripts for commitments in both directions, things the user promised to others and things others promised to the user. Maintains a running commitments.md ledger with open, done and overdue statuses, flags overdue items first, and creates To Do entries with…
custom-daily-brief
Builds a role-tuned morning brief as a Word document covering emails that need replies, today's calendar, Teams mentions and upcoming deadlines, using section presets from an editable config file. Use when the user asks for their daily brief, morning brief, start-of-day summary or custom briefing, or wants to change…
project-dashboard-builder
Generates a self-contained single-file HTML project dashboard (status banner, milestones, risks heat list, decisions log, links) from the tracker files in /Documents/Cowork/projects/, saved as dashboard- -YYYY-MM-DD.html. Use when the user asks for a project dashboard, a shareable or pinnable status page, an HTML…
chro-reviewer
Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Chief Human Resources Officer archetype, then saves a structured review document with a verdict, findings that cite the artifact, people and organisation risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks for a CHRO or HR review, a…
customer-advocate-reviewer
Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as a Customer Advocate archetype, then saves a structured review document with a verdict, findings that cite the artifact, customer-side risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks for a customer advocate review, a customer-lens or…
frontline-skeptic-reviewer
Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or rollout plan in character as a Frontline Skeptic archetype, the experienced staff member who will have to live with the change, then saves a structured review with a verdict, findings that cite the artifact, adoption risks and five interrogation questions. Use when the user…