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 bcanfield/agentic-tech-debt --skill debt-ops-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bcanfield/agentic-tech-debtWrote 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/bcanfield/agentic-tech-debt/debt-ops-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bcanfield/agentic-tech-debt/debt-ops-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bcanfield/agentic-tech-debt/debt-ops-review/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/bcanfield/agentic-tech-debt/debt-ops-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bcanfield/agentic-tech-debt/debt-ops-review.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 | $0.00072 | $0.00964 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.00386 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00193 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00096 |
Grade A, and why
debt-ops-review 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.
This is a copy
86% identical to review — 72 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
debt-ops-review — audit + (on follow-up) walk paydown
Two modes. First turn: print the audit and stop. On a user follow-up ("fix the top one," "walk these," "do A," "pay some down"), apply the rubric below.
First turn: print the audit
Run the bundled review.py (it lives in this skill's scripts/ directory —
reference it with the relative path; your agent resolves it against the skill root):
python3 scripts/review.py
Optional: --top N to surface more than the default 3 candidates.
Re-emit the helper's stdout verbatim in a fenced code block. Some agents collapse long shell outputs — if you don't print it yourself, the user might not see it. Copy exactly: no preamble, no summary, no "want me to fix the top one?" The fenced block preserves column alignment.
Then stop. The user picks the next move.
Paydown mode (only on user follow-up)
Work through requested entries one at a time. Confirm before each fix. Never auto-batch. Never auto-commit.
For each entry, read the registry file, the hotspot, and adjacent tests. Apply this rubric:
- Already fixed? If the marker/symptom the entry describes no longer appears in the hotspot file, say so and add the entry's letter to the drop list. Don't re-fix.
- Cold area? Churn=0 since
created:and age >90d → propose deferring. ~20% of files generate ~80% of debt-related rework; don't pay down vanity refactors. - Prudent-deliberate with payoff_trigger not met? Honor the trigger. Skip with a one-line "trigger not met: ."
- Fix candidate? Propose the smallest change that resolves the entry. Improvement, not perfection — don't refactor surrounding code.
When you fix
- Read the repo first. Check the test framework, adjacent tests, the project's quality commands. Adapt to what exists; don't impose a new style.
- TDD where tests exist. Write a failing test that pins the deferral, then make it pass. Don't weaken or delete existing tests to make a fix pass.
- No tests in this area? Surface that and ask: write one, or fix without?
- Explain why this resolves the entry. Cite the entry's
payoff_triggeror body — don't commit code you can't explain. - Risky fix? Auth, payments, migrations, public APIs, or
ai_authored: true→ run a fresh-context review of the diff before suggesting commit. Fresh-context review catches what the writer's motivated reasoning misses. - Don't commit. Show the diff. The user runs the gates, drops the entry, and commits.
What ships with it
1 file 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 First seen · 84 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A 9ac24ae23f50
debt-ops-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository bcanfield/agentic-tech-debt (8 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 72 tokens to every session and 964 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to review, differing in 72 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
scout-ask
Use when the working directory is a Scout vault (it has knowledge-base/ and action-items/) and the user asks about the state of a project, initiative, person, decision, meeting or open thread ("where are we on X", "what's going on with Y", "who is Z", "what's on my plate"), or what Scout knows about a topic. Do not…
backlog
Manage the project's tech debt backlog. Add, list, fix, wontfix, delete, prioritize, and suggest batch actions on tracked issues, run by the user to manage accumulated debt (skills file their findings through /.zuvo/backlog-add themselves, never through this skill). Modes: list [category], add [description], fix B- …
retro
Engineering retrospective from git metrics. Reports deployment frequency, release cycle span, churn hotspots, backlog health. Outputs narrative report with 3+ actionable items. Flags: --since, --path, explicit range argument.
ccc-fable
Arm, check, audit or disarm the Commander Method: the PM loop, 12 checkable gates, workflow-first posture and verifier separation, persisted in Commander state. Use when the user says fable on/off/status/audit or wants verification-gated, orchestrated work.
ccc-linear
View your open Linear issues, pick one to work on (moves it to In Progress and creates a branch), create a new issue, or see a board overview, all from pickers. Use when the user types $ccc-linear, asks for their Linear issues or tickets, or wants to start work from a ticket.
ccc-onboard
Contributor first-hour plan for the current repository: reads CLAUDE.md, BIBLE.md and package.json, checks required tools, asks the contributor's role, and returns a five-step checklist plus five real starter resources. Use when someone new joins a repo or types $ccc-onboard.