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 archestra-ai/archestra --skill archestra-docs-writergit 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-docs-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-docs-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-docs-writer/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/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-docs-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/archestra-ai/archestra/archestra-docs-writer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00051 | $0.05103 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.02041 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.01021 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00510 |
Grade A, and why
archestra-docs-writer 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 10d 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
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 10d ago Changed 82eb0c2ed8d9
- 12d ago Changed · +8 lines 5c7932c158a5
- 22d ago Changed · +116 lines · +12 tokens per session 68037607afba
- 1mo ago Changed · +4 lines 9dee897f2272
- 1mo ago Changed · +4 lines 79f78f1cc756
- 1mo ago First seen · 80 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 93b2b2720d41
archestra-docs-writer is a skill published in the GitHub repository archestra-ai/archestra (4,416 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 5,103 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
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…
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…
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…
quality-loop
Use this workflow recipe when a draft, plan, proposal, or other deliverable should be independently reviewed and revised until it satisfies explicit quality criteria.
mcporter
Use the mcporter CLI to list, configure, auth, and call MCP servers/tools directly (HTTP or stdio), including ad-hoc servers, config edits, CLI/type generation, and MCP-backed skills that need a durable command path.