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 alunduil/alunduil-chezmoi --skill issue-workgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alunduil/alunduil-chezmoiWrote 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/alunduil/alunduil-chezmoi/issue-work)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alunduil/alunduil-chezmoi/issue-work"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alunduil/alunduil-chezmoi/issue-work/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/alunduil/alunduil-chezmoi/issue-work"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alunduil/alunduil-chezmoi/issue-work.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 | $0.00042 | $0.00956 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00382 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00191 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00096 |
Grade A, and why
issue-work 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 14d 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 — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Issue work
Inspect
mcp__github__issue_read (method: get) returns closed_by_pull_requests: the PRs declaring Closes #N, fork PRs included, each resolved to OPEN/CLOSED/MERGED. An open one is a takeover candidate. references holds at most five, so a total_count above that means the list is partial. The same call carries the body and labels.
Comments need a second call, method: get_comments.
Unlinked work takes mcp__github__search_pull_requests, one call per field — joining them with OR drops a clause and reports no match:
repo:<owner>/<repo> <N> in:bodyrepo:<owner>/<repo> <keywords> in:title,body
Ask for fields: [number, title, state, pull_request]. state reads closed on a merged PR, so pull_request.merged_at is what separates merged (scope already covered) from abandoned.
Develop-flow branches have no MCP equivalent:
gh issue develop <N> --list
For recent commits in the area:
- Path-scoped:
git log --oneline -- <path>over files the issue names. - Otherwise:
git log --oneline --since=<issue createdAt>over the likely subsystem.
Reproduce (bug-typed issues)
Attempt repro on the default branch before writing the fix:
- A confirmed repro becomes the failing test the fix has to flip.
- A failed repro is itself a staleness signal — issue may be obsolete.
- If repro is hard because the harness for this code path doesn't exist, surface it. Tiny harness lifts can land inline; anything bigger files separately and waits for direction.
Staleness signals
Any one fires a go/no-go before writing code:
- A commit since the issue was filed already implements or supersedes the change.
- A linked PR is already merged — the issue should close, not be re-implemented.
- An unlinked merged PR covers the same scope (keyword/path search). Filers don't always cross-reference; check before duplicating work.
- The issue assumes tooling/files that have since been replaced or removed.
- The motivating dependency resolved differently (e.g. "waiting on upstream X" — X shipped via a different mechanism).
- A maintainer comment narrows or vetoes the original scope and the body wasn't updated.
- Repro fails on the default branch.
- The issue lacks enough detail to start without guessing.
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.
- 14d ago Changed · -1 lines dfd9f37f291c
- 16d ago Changed · -3 lines 8011940a7d4c
- 1mo ago First seen · 81 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 587a5526e80c
issue-work is a skill published in the GitHub repository alunduil/alunduil-chezmoi (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed 0BSD. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 956 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
work-on
Ship a GitHub issue end to end by assessing complexity and composing the available research, planning, implementation, review, commit, and pull-request workflows.
github-issues
Manage GitHub issues with gh: confirm repo and state, deduplicate, preserve evidence, and verify authorized creation, edits, labels, comments, or closure.
project-backlog
Turn audit findings into deduplicated, prioritized issue drafts with dependencies and explicit authorization before GitHub mutation.
autopilot
Carry a well-scoped GitHub issue through the full dev loop autonomously, stopping at a per-run tier boundary (PR-ready, or merge+deploy for small reversible changes).
autopilot-triage
Vet open issues for autonomous resolution and queue the qualifying ones with the autopilot-queued label — the start-of-day "fill the queue" half of the triage → run split.
create-pr
Create a pull request with auto-generated description, issue linking, ROADMAP updates, and PR-metadata validation.