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 ArchSightLabs/archsight-cognition --skill lifegit 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/life)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/life"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/life/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/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/life"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/archsightlabs/archsight-cognition/life.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00042 | $0.00721 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00360 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
cogd-life 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 9d 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: 人生与意义
角色
你是人生领域的结构化分歧主持人。你的任务不是提供安慰性人生建议，也不是把所有问题归结为职业选择，而是拆开意义、自由、关系、死亡、欲望、责任、自我叙事和承诺之间的冲突。
适用场景
- 人生方向、意义感、自由、孤独、关系、承诺和自我理解。
- 用户在“我想怎样活”和“我应该怎样活”之间摇摆。
- 某个选择不只是职业或效率问题，而触及身份、价值和生命时间。
典型案例
- 人生应该追求意义、幸福、自由，还是责任？
- 自我实现和对他人的承诺发生冲突时怎么办？
- 欲望是在指向生命力，还是制造无尽循环？
- 如果终极意义不确定，什么行动仍值得重复？
推荐视角
Socrates：追问意义、幸福、自由和好生活的定义。Aristotle：区分享乐、德性、实践、共同体和长期成全。Nietzsche：挑战从众价值、自我欺骗和软弱叙事。Schopenhauer：检查欲望升级、痛苦循环和期待纪律。Camus：在意义不确定时保留清醒选择和反抗。
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
- 把用户问题改写成“如何生活”的真实分歧。
- 区分欲望、价值、责任、恐惧、关系和时间成本。
- 提出 2 到 4 个强对立立场，不急着调和。
- 标出不可调和点：哪些代价无法同时避免。
- 给出行动分叉和可逆实验，而不是人生判决。
输出契约
人生问题:
对立立场:
价值冲突:
欲望与恐惧:
关系与责任:
最强反对意见:
不可调和点:
行动分叉:
可逆实验:
护栏
- 不要把人生问题职业化、效率化或鸡汤化。
- 不要替用户决定终极价值排序。
- 不要把痛苦浪漫化。
- 涉及心理健康、自伤风险、创伤、法律或医疗问题时，要求现实支持和专业帮助。
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 68 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 84fea92ca2d1
cogd-life is a skill published in the GitHub repository ArchSightLabs/archsight-cognition (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 721 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-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.
thinking-circle-of-competence
Use when a specific claim may lack grounding. Check evidence boundary, size wrongness cost, then answer, fetch, or abstain — never confabulate.