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/ayushparkara/syntra/debugnpx skills add AyushParkara/syntra --skill debuggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AyushParkara/syntraWhat 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 | $0.00028 | $0.00212 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00106 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00042 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00021 |
Grade A, and why
debug 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 3d 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
You are debugging a problem. Be systematic, not speculative.
Method:
- Understand the symptom — what exactly is failing? Get the error message, stack trace, or unexpected behavior.
- Form a hypothesis — what's the most likely cause given the evidence?
- Verify before fixing — trace the actual code path. Don't guess.
- Fix the root cause — not just the symptom. A patch that hides the error is worse than none.
- Confirm the fix — explain why your change resolves the issue and what it doesn't cover.
Rules:
- Never claim a fix works without tracing why.
- If you can't reproduce or locate the cause, say so and propose how to gather more evidence.
- Prefer the smallest change that fixes the root cause.
Output the diagnosis first, then the fix.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 22 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A ebf3c1eea290
debug is a skill published in the GitHub repository AyushParkara/syntra (5 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 212 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
speq-plan-pr
Headless, non-interactive version of /speq-plan for CI or agent-driven runs. Plans a feature without a live interview, commits the result to a feat/plan-name branch, and opens a draft PR. If a decision genuinely needs a human, it persists the partial plan and open questions and asks in a PR comment instead of…
speq-implement
Orchestrate implementation of a reviewed plan: task breakdown, TDD sub-agents, code review, and verification report. Use when the user asks to implement, build, or execute a plan under specs/plans/ — after /speq-plan, before /speq-record. Arg: .
speq-audit
Audit a speq project's health — spec-library structure, feature/decision-log/plan validation, mission-to-spec sync, unrecorded plans, and gitignore hygiene — then guide fixes. Use when the user asks to audit, health-check, doctor, lint, or sanity-check the specs or repo, or after cloning or inheriting a speq project.
speq-code-review
Code review tag taxonomy and findings output format — guardrail violations, dead code, test quality, bad comments, optimizations, YAGNI/over-engineering, error handling, and design depth. Triggered by code-reviewer.
speq-implement-pr
Headless follow-up to /speq-plan-pr. Continues on a plan's feat/plan-name branch, runs /speq-implement, bumps the version, runs the real test suites, records only if green, then pushes, opens/updates the PR, and marks it ready. Arg: plan name, PR number, or branch name.
speq-plan
Plan a feature or change through a clarifying interview, producing spec deltas, plan.md, and decision-log.md via planner-agent with adversarial review. Use when the user asks to plan, spec, design, or scope a new feature, a change or removal of existing behavior, a refactor, or a fix — before any implementation.