Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SEnpx agentmods add skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/git-bisect-assistantWrote 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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/git-bisect-assistant)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/git-bisect-assistant"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/git-bisect-assistant/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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/git-bisect-assistant"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/git-bisect-assistant.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 3 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00064 | $0.01148 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00459 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00230 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
git-bisect-assistant 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 1mo 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 — 163 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Git Bisect Assistant
Automates the git bisect process to efficiently identify the first bad commit responsible for a bug or test failure.
Quick Start
Basic usage pattern:
python scripts/git_bisect_runner.py \
--good <known-good-commit> \
--bad <known-bad-commit> \
--test "<test-command>"
Example:
python scripts/git_bisect_runner.py \
--good v1.0.0 \
--bad HEAD \
--test "pytest tests/test_feature.py::test_specific_case"
Workflow
-
Gather Information
- Identify the known good revision (commit, tag, or branch)
- Identify the known bad revision (defaults to HEAD)
- Determine the test command that fails on bad commits and passes on good commits
-
Run Bisect
- Execute the
git_bisect_runner.pyscript with appropriate parameters - The script will automatically test commits and narrow down the culprit
- Execute the
-
Review Results
- Examine the identified bad commit
- Review the bisect log showing all tested commits
- Check confidence level and assumptions
Parameters
Required
--good: Known good revision (commit hash, tag, or branch name)--test: Shell command to test each commit. Exit code 0 = good, non-zero = bad
Optional
--bad: Known bad revision (default:HEAD)--repo: Repository path (default: current directory)--retries: Number of test runs per commit for flaky tests (default: 1)--timeout: Test execution timeout in seconds (default: no timeout)
Handling Flaky Tests
For non-deterministic tests, use --retries to run the test multiple times per commit:
python scripts/git_bisect_runner.py \
--good abc123 \
--bad HEAD \
--test "npm test" \
--retries 3
The script uses majority voting: if a test passes 2 out of 3 times, the commit is marked as good.
Test Command Guidelines
The test command should:
- Exit with code 0 for good commits (test passes)
- Exit with non-zero code for bad commits (test fails)
- Be deterministic or use
--retriesfor flaky tests - Complete within reasonable time or use
--timeout
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 163 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A 0c83b77230fc
git-bisect-assistant is a skill published in the GitHub repository ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE (258 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 1,148 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
setup-pre-commit
Set up Husky pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in the current repo. Use when user wants to add pre-commit hooks, set up Husky, configure lint-staged, or add commit-time formatting/typechecking/testing.
lineage
Use when asked why code exists or why it works the way it does - "why is this here", "why did we pick Y", "who added this and for what", "is it safe to remove", a regression's origin, a magic threshold, or a workaround with no comment - and before deleting or reshaping code whose reason you cannot see.
fix-issue
Fix a GitHub issue end-to-end -- read the issue, implement the fix, write tests, and create a commit. Use when you want to fix a specific GitHub issue, resolve a bug report, or implement a feature request.
skill-pr-review
Comprehensive code review for pull requests using parallel multi-agent analysis. Audits CLAUDE.md compliance, checks for bugs, analyzes git history, reviews comments, and filters by confidence score. Use when reviewing a GitHub PR, mentions "code review", "review this PR", or "/code-review".
diagnose
Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test. Use when user says "diagnose this" / "debug this", reports a bug, says something is broken/throwing/failing, or describes a performance regression.
skill-incident-management
Incident response, postmortem facilitation, root cause analysis (RCA), blameless culture, incident timeline documentation, and incident classification. Use when responding to production incidents, writing incident reports, facilitating postmortems, or improving incident response processes.