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 ariaxhan/kernel-claude --skill experimentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ariaxhan/kernel-claudeWrote 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/ariaxhan/kernel-claude/experiment)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ariaxhan/kernel-claude/experiment"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ariaxhan/kernel-claude/experiment/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/ariaxhan/kernel-claude/experiment"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ariaxhan/kernel-claude/experiment.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 Agent Snooping · line 34 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
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 | $0.00034 | $0.02442 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00977 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00488 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00244 |
Grade A, and why
experiment 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 — 250 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
- No hypotheses? Seeds them from CLAUDE.md.
- Hypotheses exist? Picks the most uncertain, designs an experiment, runs it.
- Evidence accumulating? Graduates proven rules, kills disproven ones.
- Everything tested? Reports and stops.
Rules that survive become convictions. Rules that fail become learnings.
<skill_load> always: skills/quality/SKILL.md, skills/build/reference/testing.md </skill_load>
<on_start>
agentdb read-start
agentdb emit command "experiment-start" "" '{}'
</on_start>
```bash
agentdb hypothesis list 2>/dev/null
```
Decision tree (no human input needed):
1. No hypotheses table or empty? → go to SEED phase.
2. Hypotheses exist but all are unproven? → go to PICK phase.
3. Mix of tested/untested? → go to PICK phase (prioritize untested).
4. All have >= 3 experiments? → go to JUDGE phase.
5. Graduation/kill candidates exist? → go to EVOLVE phase.
Parse rule-like patterns:
- Imperative: "Always X", "Never Y", "Prefer Z", "Must W"
- Anti-patterns: block actions, "Don't", "Forbidden"
- Assertions: "X before Y", "X is better than Y"
- Quantitative claims: "reduces by X%", "takes N minutes"
- Conditional: "If X then Y", "When X, do Y"
For each rule:
```bash
agentdb hypothesis add "<statement>" --domain <auto-classify> --source "<file:line>"
```
Domain auto-classification by keyword:
- research, anti-pattern, prior work → methodology
- parallel, agent, spawn, tier → coordination
- test, coverage, edge case, mock → testing
- commit, branch, merge, PR → git
- secret, validation, auth, injection → security
- measure, optimize, latency, profile → performance
- Big 5, review, quality → quality
- module, interface, coupling → architecture
Deduplicate: skip if near-identical statement already exists.
Log count, then immediately proceed to PICK. No pause.
```bash
agentdb emit command "experiment-seed" "" '{"seeded":N}'
```
Priority order:
1. **Most uncertain**: confidence closest to 0.5 (maximum ignorance — any experiment is maximally informative)
2. **Least tested**: fewest total experiments (break ties)
3. **Highest impact domain**: methodology > coordination > security > testing > quality > git > architecture > performance
```sql
SELECT id, statement, domain, confidence, evidence_for + evidence_against as total_evidence
FROM hypotheses
WHERE status NOT IN ('graduated', 'refuted')
ORDER BY ABS(confidence - 0.5) ASC, total_evidence ASC
LIMIT 1;
```
**Falsifiability gate: if no possible outcome could refute the hypothesis, redesign.**
Every experiment defines BEFORE running: method, quantitative measurement, control
condition (what happens WITHOUT the rule), pass_criteria, fail_criteria.
Choose the LIGHTEST experiment type that produces signal:
1. **HISTORICAL** (cheapest — query existing data):
Query agentdb learnings, session outcomes, error patterns for evidence.
Use when: agentdb has >= 10 sessions or >= 20 learnings in the domain.
2. **COMPARATIVE** (medium — run a real task two ways):
Execute WITH the rule applied, then WITHOUT (or find prior without-cases).
Measure: time, error count, rework, quality.
3. **ABLATION** (medium — remove the rule, observe):
Temporarily ignore the rule during a real task. Record what breaks.
4. **OBSERVATIONAL** (passive — tag next N tasks):
Flag the hypothesis; future relevant tasks collect evidence passively.
Use when: active experimentation would be disruptive.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · -13 tokens per session 0b53199f3123
- 1mo ago First seen · 250 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 9484d7506ad8
experiment is a skill published in the GitHub repository ariaxhan/kernel-claude (14 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 2,442 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
Self-Review
Spawn a reviewer subagent with 4-6 specific verification questions before declaring non-trivial code work done. Triggers when changes are >30 LOC, multi-file, hot-path, prompt-affecting, or genuinely uncertain. Bad asks produce bad answers — this skill forces structured verification questions, not "is this good?".
nightly-close-parity
Unique project-local fire verb for the seven-leg nightly close-parity pass. Proves and loads the canonical top-level skill.
tdd
Apply when adding new behavior or fixing a bug. Red-green-refactor cycle, test-first discipline, when TDD doesn't pay.
Pair Programming
AI-assisted pair programming with multiple modes (driver/navigator/switch), real-time verification, quality monitoring, and comprehensive testing. Supports TDD, debugging, refactoring, and learning sessions. Features automatic role switching, continuous code review, security scanning, and performance optimization with…
V3 Core Implementation
Core module implementation for claude-flow v3. Implements DDD domains, clean architecture patterns, dependency injection, and modular TypeScript codebase with comprehensive testing.
Verification & Quality Assurance
Comprehensive truth scoring, code quality verification, and automatic rollback system with 0.95 accuracy threshold for ensuring high-quality agent outputs and codebase reliability.