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 AmariahAK/atlarix-skills --skill git-workflowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AmariahAK/atlarix-skillsWrote 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/amariahak/atlarix-skills/git-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/amariahak/atlarix-skills/git-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/amariahak/atlarix-skills/git-workflow.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00002 | $0.00919 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00460 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00184 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00092 |
Grade A, and why
Git Workflow 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 4d 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 — 124 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Git Workflow
When to use this skill
Use this skill when you want a clean Git history (easy reviews, easy rollbacks) and consistent PR hygiene—especially when an agent is helping you make changes across multiple files.
Core patterns
Conventional commits (recommended)
Format:
<type>(<scope>): <summary>
Types:
feat: new behavior or capabilityfix: bug fixrefactor: behavior-preserving code changedocs: documentation onlytest: tests onlychore: tooling, deps, CI, non-product changes
Examples:
fix(chat): always emit response end on errorsfeat(skills): add registry scaffolding and validationrefactor(compaction): centralize execution path
Breaking changes:
- Add
!after type/scope:feat(api)!: change auth token format - Or add
BREAKING CHANGE:in body
Branch naming
Use a consistent prefix:
feat/<short-kebab>fix/<short-kebab>docs/<short-kebab>chore/<short-kebab>
Examples:
feat/skills-registryfix/stream-terminal-event
Atomic commits
Rule: one logical change per commit.
Good:
- Commit 1: “Add tool contract block”
- Commit 2: “Update read_attachment prompt examples”
Bad:
- “Fix everything” commit that mixes UI, backend, and docs
Squash vs merge vs rebase
- Squash merge: best for feature branches with messy WIP commits
- Merge commit: best when you want to preserve full branch context (rare for small changes)
- Rebase: good for keeping a linear history, but be careful on shared branches
Guideline:
- If a PR has 10+ micro commits (“fix lint”, “oops”), squash before merging.
- If commits are already atomic and readable, merge without squashing.
Writing PR descriptions (what/why/how/testing)
Good PRs are reviewable because they explain intent:
Template:
- What changed: the user-visible / system-visible behavior
- Why: the problem or constraint
- How: the approach (short)
- Test plan: exact commands + manual steps
Conflict resolution workflow
When conflicts happen:
- Rebase or merge main into your branch
- Resolve conflicts by choosing intent, not just “keep both”
- Re-run tests
- Confirm build/typecheck
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 124 lines · 2 tokens per session scan A fe7544bb2f74
Git Workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository AmariahAK/atlarix-skills (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 2 tokens to every session and 919 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
review-gate
Use before an agent-produced diff is committed, pushed, opened as a PR, merged, landed, or applied to user files when explicit implementation approval is missing. Trigger for review gate, review pack, approve before landing, diff first then land, human approval, merge gate, commit gate, push gate, or PR readiness.…
work-unit-commits
Plan commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.
push-all
Use when the user explicitly asks to stage all current changes, create a commit, and push to the remote after safety checks.
github-commenting
How to post clean, rich, deduplicated GitHub PR review comments — suggestion blocks, multi-line anchors, markers, formatting rules. Load before posting or fixing any PR comment.
procoder
Work like a senior developer in a repository governed by procoder: run the commit gate before calling anything done, format and lint through the binary, and drive the spec, plan, todo, backlog, and sprint chain in .procoder/. Use this skill when the repository contains a .procoder/ directory or an AGENTS.md naming…
pr-workflow
Prepares branches and PRs for clean, reviewable merges.