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/blackms/aistack/consensusnpx skills add blackms/aistack --skill consensusgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/blackms/aistackWhat 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 | $0.00075 | $0.00627 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00313 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00125 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00063 |
Grade A, and why
aistack-consensus 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 45 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
aistack: Consensus checkpoints (human-in-the-loop)
aistack lets agents pause before high-impact actions and request explicit approval. This prevents autonomous agents from taking irreversible or risky steps without a human (or a designated approver) signing off.
When to use
- Before an irreversible or high-blast-radius action: production deploy, DB schema migration, deleting data, force-push, mass file rewrite, spending money, sending external messages.
- When the user wants approval gates, sign-off, or "ask me before doing X".
- In an autonomous loop (see
/aistack-pm) where some steps must not run unattended.
For low-risk, easily reversible actions, do NOT add a checkpoint — it just adds friction.
MCP tools (bundled aistack server)
| Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|
consensus_check |
Propose an action and create a pending checkpoint requiring approval |
consensus_list_pending |
List checkpoints awaiting a decision |
consensus_get |
Inspect a specific checkpoint |
consensus_approve |
Approve a pending checkpoint (the action may proceed) |
consensus_reject |
Reject a checkpoint (the action must not proceed) |
List exact schemas with npx @blackms/aistack mcp tools.
Workflow
- Detect the gate: classify the next action's risk. If it is irreversible / high-impact, do not execute it directly.
- Propose: call
consensus_checkdescribing the exact action, its blast radius, and how to undo it (if possible). This creates a pending checkpoint. - Pause & surface: stop and tell the human what is pending and why, then wait. Do not proceed on assumption.
- Resolve: on
consensus_approve, perform the action. Onconsensus_reject, abort cleanly, report, and propose a safer alternative if one exists. - Record: store the decision and its rationale in aistack memory (see the
aistack-memoryskill) for an audit trail.
Tips
- Make each proposal self-contained: a reviewer should be able to decide from the checkpoint text alone, without re-reading the whole session.
- Default to a checkpoint when uncertain whether an action is reversible. Over-gating is annoying; under-gating is dangerous.
- Combine with
/aistack-reviewto run an adversarial pass before requesting approval, so the human reviews a vetted action.
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 · 45 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 85533b20cdc1
aistack-consensus is a skill published in the GitHub repository blackms/aistack (53 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 627 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…