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 agentmods add skills/anuj7411/sipcode/impactnpx skills add Anuj7411/sipcode --skill impactgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Anuj7411/sipcodeWhat 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 | $0.00069 | $0.00488 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00244 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00098 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
impact 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 2d 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.
What it actually says
Sipcode — Impact (the savings verifier)
Call the sipcode:verify_sipcode_impact MCP tool to produce a structured before/after comparison.
Critical: respect the integrity contract. The tool's response is structured with these key fields:
status— one of:"measured","insufficient-post-data","no-install-marker","no-baseline","no-post-sessions","window-asymmetry-<N>d-vs-<M>d"delta— present (numbers) ONLY whenstatus === "measured". Null in every other case by design. When delta is null, DO NOT compute a savings number from before/after totals. The windows aren't comparable.allTime— present only when no marker exists. Contains the user's total session count across all time, so the user sees their data exists even when no A/B split is possible.warningReason— explains why delta is null (e.g.,"window-asymmetry-39d-vs-2d","insufficient-post-data-2d-vs-min-3d").headline— the canonical one-line summary; trust this and surface it.
When status === "measured": lead with the output-ratio change (the only normalization-resistant metric). Mention token + dollar savings as secondary. Include the window-length caveat.
When status !== "measured": present the headline and the next-step recommendation from the notes field. Do not invent a savings number. The tool's delta: null is structurally enforced — do not work around it.
If the user pushes back and asks you to compute a number anyway, refuse and explain the structural reason: the comparison windows aren't fair, so any delta would be misleading. Suggest they pass since: "YYYY-MM-DD" to set a manual pivot, or run sipcode rules --install to start measuring forward.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 22 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A 6b70de52c59f
impact is a skill published in the GitHub repository Anuj7411/sipcode (46 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 488 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
audit-pr-architecture
Audit a PR's structural choices against architecture-priming, the repo's own architecture.md, and any nested boundary configs. Use when the user says "audit this PR's architecture", "check the boundaries", "is this PR clean structurally", "post-merge review of.
docs-voice
Voice, tone, and format for the public Codemap docs (apps/docs, built with Blume). Use when authoring or editing apps/docs prose — landing, guides, concepts, recipes, reference, generated API — or deciding headline grammar, benefit framing, peer framing, or anti-pitch wording.
improve-codebase-architecture
Find deepening opportunities in the codebase, informed by the domain language in docs/glossary.md and the architecture in docs/architecture.md. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.
writing-agents-config
Codemap repo hybrid deltas for .agents/ — tiers, rule-skill pairing, repo exemplars. Use when creating or reviewing rules/skills in this repo. Read writing-great-skills first for skill vocabulary and authoring principles.
agents-tier-system
Full tier assignments, pairing conventions, and authoring checklist for .agents/ rules and skills. Use when creating or reviewing a rule or skill, deciding Tier 1 vs 2 vs 3, or auditing attachment cost.
verify-after-each-step
Per-file verification checklist — lint-staged and package.json scripts after each milestone.