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 AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards --skill ac-coveragegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standardsWrote 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/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/ac-coverage)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/ac-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/ac-coverage/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/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/ac-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/asiaostrich/universal-dev-standards/ac-coverage.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 | $0.00178 | $0.02443 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00071 | $0.00977 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00489 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00244 |
Grade A, and why
ac-coverage 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.
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 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 Changed · +11 lines 52a462d5f7bc
- 1mo ago First seen · 195 lines · 178 tokens per session scan A 12104033de16
ac-coverage is a skill published in the GitHub repository AsiaOstrich/universal-dev-standards (79 stars, last pushed yesterday), with no licence file. It adds 178 tokens to every session and 2,443 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
python-idioms
Modern Python (3.11+) idioms: type annotations, typing Protocols, Pydantic models, asyncio, pytest fixtures, and Ruff/Mypy strict compliance. Use when writing, refactoring, or reviewing Python applications, APIs, or scripts.
compiler-verify
Use when you need to run all compiler checks (tests, lint, format) before committing. Detects whether TS or Rust code changed and runs the appropriate checks.
codebase-review
Review an entire codebase for architecture, engineering health, and exploitable risk; generate a prioritized remediation plan, an evidence-anchored system knowledge document, or both.
review-system-design
Review a system design someone else provided - screenshot, drawio, Mermaid, slides, doc, or IaC - by extracting it into a confirmed fact sheet, then scoring it on the nine axes.
review-ticket
Review a ticket or PR through focused specialist lenses: scope, architecture, security, tests, AC coverage, and PR metadata.
verify-work
Verify feature, bug, UI, API, mobile, security, or deployment work against acceptance criteria.