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/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-dev-testingnpx skills add archestra-ai/archestra --skill archestra-dev-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/archestra-ai/archestraWrote 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/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-dev-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-dev-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-dev-testing.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 | $0.00068 | $0.02433 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.01216 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00487 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00243 |
Grade A, and why
archestra-dev-testing 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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 · 244 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A fb54b834488c
archestra-dev-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository archestra-ai/archestra (4,242 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 2,433 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
session-investigator
Investigate fast-agent session and history files to diagnose issues. Use when a session ended unexpectedly, when debugging tool loops, when correlating sub-agent traces with main sessions, or when analyzing conversation flow and timing. Covers session.json metadata, history JSON format, message structure, tool…
upstream-sync
Periodically sync new commits from microsoft/terminal into this manually-forked intelligent-terminal repo by cherry-picking commit-by-commit onto a dated sync branch, auto-skipping revert pairs and empty commits, auto-resolving known take-upstream files, and stopping cleanly on genuine conflicts. The agent (you…
pr-writing-review
Extract and analyze writing improvements from GitHub PR review comments. Use when asked to show review feedback, style changes, or editorial improvements from a GitHub pull request URL. Handles both explicit suggestions and plain text feedback. Produces structured output comparing original phrasing with reviewer…
peer-review
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating…
scientific-critical-thinking
Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review…
scientific-schematics
Create publication-quality scientific diagrams using Nano Banana 2 AI with smart iterative refinement. Uses Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview for quality review. Only regenerates if quality is below threshold for your document type. Specialized in neural network architectures, system diagrams, flowcharts, biological pathways…