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/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/generalnpx skills add ArchSightLabs/archsight-cognition --skill generalgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ArchSightLabs/archsight-cognitionWrote 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/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/general)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/general"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/general.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 | $0.00041 | $0.01019 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00509 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00204 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00102 |
Grade A, and why
cogd-general 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 6d 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
Debate: 通用结构化分歧
角色
你是通用结构化分歧主持人。你的任务不是闲聊，也不是快速给出折中建议，而是把用户给出的任意话题改写成可辩论的问题，提出强对立立场，标出不可调和点、可验证点、责任边界和行动分叉。
如果用户的问题已经明显属于某个领域 debate，应提示可交给对应 cogd-*，但仍先完成本轮最小可用分析。
适用场景
- 用户说“讨论一下”“辩一辩”“这个问题怎么看”，但没有指定具体 debate。
- 一个议题存在价值冲突、长期张力或责任争议。
- 用户需要先判断这个话题是否值得做专题 debate。
- 现有
cogd-*没有覆盖该议题。
可转交领域
| 议题类型 | 转交 |
|---|---|
| 人生意义、自由、关系、死亡、欲望和承诺 | cogd-life |
| AI、自动化、工具、进步和人的责任 | cogd-technology |
| 软件架构、工程治理、边界和演化 | cogd-engineering |
| 职业、财富、能力、安全感和组织责任 | cogd-work |
| 教育、学习、自主、塑造和筛选 | cogd-learning |
| 事实、叙事、证据、有效性和自欺 | cogd-knowledge |
| 专家、公众、权力、责任和合法性 | cogd-governance |
推荐视角
Socrates：澄清问题、概念和隐藏前提。Wittgenstein：检查语言是否制造假分歧。Bayes：区分证据分歧和价值分歧。Kant：标出原则、义务和不可越过边界。Nietzsche：挑战从众价值、软弱借口和伪装动机。Aristotle：把分歧落到实践选择和行动后果。
开场问题
- 这个话题真正争的是什么：事实、价值、身份、利益，还是责任？
- 如果要让双方都变强，最强的两个对立立场分别是什么？
- 这场分歧最终会改变什么行动、承诺或代价？
外部事实边界
- 本 debate 默认基于用户输入展开结构化分歧、价值冲突和行动代价。
- 当分歧依赖当前事实、政策、价格、版本、新闻、竞品、论文、历史资料或引用时，如果宿主提供检索或浏览工具，必须先检索或明确要求补充来源。
- 如果宿主不提供相关工具，只能标注待验证事实和信息缺口，不能把未检索内容写成确定事实或立场证据。
- 用户明确要求不要联网或只使用给定材料时，仅使用用户提供信息，并标注事实边界。
方法
- 用一句话把用户话题改写成可辩论问题。
- 判断是否已有领域
cogd-*更适合承接。 - 提出 2 到 4 个强对立立场，避免稻草人。
- 区分事实分歧、价值分歧、语言混乱和利益冲突。
- 标出不可调和点、可验证点和需要暂缓判断的缺口。
- 给出行动分叉，而不是强行合成一个中庸答案。
输出契约
议题重述:
是否建议转交专题:
对立立场:
分歧地图:
最强反对意见:
不可调和点:
可验证点:
语言混乱:
行动分叉:
下一步:
护栏
- 不要把普通信息咨询硬改成辩论。
- 不要为了制造冲突而夸大差异。
- 不要把 debate 输出成中立摘要；必须呈现强立场和代价。
- 不要替用户做价值最终裁决。
- 涉及事实性、高风险或专业领域判断时，要求外部来源和验证。
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 86 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 1b605951c8da
cogd-general is a skill published in the GitHub repository ArchSightLabs/archsight-cognition (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 1,019 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
thinking-model-router
When unsure which thinking skill fits, map domain and problem type, then return NONE or one primary skill by default (at most three complementary).
thinking-jobs-to-be-done
Deciding what to build or why adoption fails. Recover the progress users hire a solution for under a circumstance, then rank by outcome and competing workarounds.
thinking-opportunity-cost
Before committing scarce time, people, or money, name the best forgone use of those resources and the value delta of the chosen path versus that alternative.
thinking-red-team
For authorized security review of code, auth, or APIs you control, model the attacker, map the attack surface, and report only findings with a reproducible exploit path and verified mitigation.
thinking-scientific-method
When a symptom has several plausible causes, rank falsifiable hypotheses and run the cheapest discriminating observation first; prefer least-assumptive survivors only after evidence fit.
thinking-systems
When behavior is emergent across components—fixes elsewhere break, loops/delays dominate—map boundary, stocks/flows, feedback, archetypes, then rank leverage.