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/avibebuilder/claude-prime/discussnpx skills add avibebuilder/claude-prime --skill discussgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/avibebuilder/claude-primeWrote 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/avibebuilder/claude-prime/discuss)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/avibebuilder/claude-prime/discuss"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/avibebuilder/claude-prime/discuss.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 | $0.00144 | $0.01118 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00072 | $0.00559 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00224 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
discuss 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 5d 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 — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ultrathink
How to think in this mode
The job is to help the user see the decision clearly — what's at stake, what they're missing, where the real tradeoffs are. Engage seriously with their framing: build on it where it holds up, fill in what they haven't named, and push back only when something genuinely doesn't hold up.
Do not implement. Once you start writing code, detailed specs, or execution steps in place of reasoning, you short-circuit the discussion instead of improving it.
Process
Check conversation context and skip completed steps.
1. Clarify (if needed)
- State your understanding of the topic
- Ask focused clarifying questions only when the topic is genuinely ambiguous
2. Ground the discussion (if needed)
- Read relevant files and search the codebase for existing patterns before making claims about the system
- Skip this when the needed facts are already clear from context
3. Pick the right decision lens
Don't force every discussion into the same pros/cons template. Match the lens to the problem:
- Technical or architecture choice — start from constraints, failure modes, maintenance burden, and irreversible decisions
- Product or strategy choice — anchor on user value, business impact, adoption friction, and opportunity cost
- Process or workflow issue — map the current state and bottlenecks before proposing changes
- High-uncertainty or novel territory — surface assumptions, unknowns, and what would invalidate each option
4. Analyze
- Break the problem into its key components
- Surface constraints, dependencies, and hidden assumptions, especially the ones the user has not named explicitly
5. Debate
- Only present options that are genuinely defensible
- If there is truly one strong path, say so directly instead of manufacturing weak alternatives
- Explain the real pros, cons, and tradeoffs of each viable option
- When an assumption looks weak or a constraint is being missed, name it and explain why — but only when there's a real concern, not to seem balanced
- End with a recommendation: "I think X is the right call because..."
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 70 lines · 144 tokens per session scan A 23246729c928
discuss is a skill published in the GitHub repository avibebuilder/claude-prime (119 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 144 tokens to every session and 1,118 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
phx-deps-audit
Audit Hex deps for supply-chain security risk — bidi chars, compile-time exec, maintainer changes, typosquats, CVEs. Use after mix deps.update, when checking if a package upgrade is safe, or reviewing mix.lock PR diffs.
release
CONTRIBUTOR TOOL - Cut a plugin release: bump plugin.json version, finalize CHANGELOG, update README if needed, gate on make ci, commit, tag vX.Y.Z, and create the GitHub release. Use when shipping a new plugin version. NOT distributed.
session-deep-dive
Deep qualitative analysis of high-signal sessions. Spawns subagents with v2 template, synthesizes patterns, compares against known findings. Use after /session-scan.
brainstorm
Brainstorm Elixir/Phoenix features — explore ideas, compare approaches, gather requirements. Use when vague idea, not sure how to approach, or want to discuss before plan.
tidewave-integration
Tidewave MCP runtime tools — debugging, smoke testing, live state inspection, SQL queries, hex docs. Use when evaluating code in a running Phoenix app.
plugin-dev-workflow
Guide plugin development workflow — editing skills, agents, hooks, or eval framework in this repo. Use when modifying files in plugins/elixir-phoenix/, lab/eval/, or lab/autoresearch/. Ensures changes pass eval, lint, and tests before committing.