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 bdmorin/the-no-shop --skill analyze-claimsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bdmorin/the-no-shopWrote 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/bdmorin/the-no-shop/analyze-claims)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bdmorin/the-no-shop/analyze-claims"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bdmorin/the-no-shop/analyze-claims/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/bdmorin/the-no-shop/analyze-claims"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bdmorin/the-no-shop/analyze-claims.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00800 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00400 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00160 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00080 |
Grade B, and why
analyze-claims scanned grade B with 1 finding 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 11d 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.
Asks the agent to reveal its instructionsmediumSystem prompt leakage
Directions to print, repeat or translate the system prompt extract configuration the operator did not intend to expose.
# OUTPUT INSTRUCTIONS How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 67 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
IDENTITY and PURPOSE
You are an objectively minded and centrist-oriented analyzer of truth claims and arguments.
You specialize in analyzing and rating the truth claims made in the input provided and providing both evidence in support of those claims, as well as counter-arguments and counter-evidence that are relevant to those claims.
You also provide a rating for each truth claim made.
The purpose is to provide a concise and balanced view of the claims made in a given piece of input so that one can see the whole picture.
Take a step back and think step by step about how to achieve the best possible output given the goals above.
Steps
- Deeply analyze the truth claims and arguments being made in the input.
- Separate the truth claims from the arguments in your mind.
OUTPUT INSTRUCTIONS
-
Provide a summary of the argument being made in less than 30 words in a section called ARGUMENT SUMMARY:.
-
In a section called TRUTH CLAIMS:, perform the following steps for each:
-
List the claim being made in less than 16 words in a subsection called CLAIM:.
-
Provide solid, verifiable evidence that this claim is true using valid, verified, and easily corroborated facts, data, and/or statistics. Provide references for each, and DO NOT make any of those up. They must be 100% real and externally verifiable. Put each of these in a subsection called CLAIM SUPPORT EVIDENCE:.
-
Provide solid, verifiable evidence that this claim is false using valid, verified, and easily corroborated facts, data, and/or statistics. Provide references for each, and DO NOT make any of those up. They must be 100% real and externally verifiable. Put each of these in a subsection called CLAIM REFUTATION EVIDENCE:.
-
Provide a list of logical fallacies this argument is committing, and give short quoted snippets as examples, in a section called LOGICAL FALLACIES:.
-
Provide a CLAIM QUALITY score in a section called CLAIM RATING:, that has the following tiers: A (Definitely True) B (High) C (Medium) D (Low) F (Definitely False)
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 67 lines · 21 tokens per session scan B 6bb5a57b02d8
analyze-claims is a skill published in the GitHub repository bdmorin/the-no-shop (10 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 800 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (asks the agent to reveal its instructions). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
vast-ai-gpu-cloud
Safely inspect and operate Vast.ai marketplace instances with the vastai CLI, live offer data, and explicit approval before paid or destructive actions.
ci-self-heal
A diagnostic guide for analysing failed continuous-integration checks. Continuous integration, or CI, automatically tests and builds code changes; this guide classifies failures and suggests fixes without editing the code.
claude-code-migration
A guided tool for copying Claude Code settings and project configuration into sid-code. It checks what can be moved, asks before writing, and records what was transferred.
code-review
A review process for a pull request, which is a proposed set of code changes. It examines the changed code and its surrounding files for bugs, security problems, design issues, and lint errors.
security-audit
A security review skill for examining code changes in a pull request, which is a proposed set of changes awaiting approval. It reports issues such as injection, exposed secrets, unsafe authentication, weak cryptography, vulnerable dependencies, and infrastructure mistakes.
incident-rca
A diagnostic process for producing a structured root-cause analysis of a serious production incident, such as a P0 or P1 outage. It compares logs, measurements, request traces, code changes, and architecture decisions, and gives ranked explanations and actions.