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 boshi-xixixi/TraeSkill --skill folder-structure-blueprint-generatorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/boshi-xixixi/TraeSkillWrote 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/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/folder-structure-blueprint-generator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/folder-structure-blueprint-generator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/folder-structure-blueprint-generator/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/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/folder-structure-blueprint-generator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/boshi-xixixi/traeskill/folder-structure-blueprint-generator.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 | $0.02939 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.01470 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00588 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00294 |
Grade A, and why
folder-structure-blueprint-generator 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 6d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- folder-structure-blueprint-generator — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 406 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Project Folder Structure Blueprint Generator
Configuration Variables
${PROJECT_TYPE="Auto-detect|.NET|Java|React|Angular|Python|Node.js|Flutter|Other"}
${INCLUDES_MICROSERVICES="Auto-detect|true|false"}
${INCLUDES_FRONTEND="Auto-detect|true|false"}
${IS_MONOREPO="Auto-detect|true|false"}
${VISUALIZATION_STYLE="ASCII|Markdown List|Table"}
${DEPTH_LEVEL=1-5}
${INCLUDE_FILE_COUNTS=true|false}
${INCLUDE_GENERATED_FOLDERS=true|false}
${INCLUDE_FILE_PATTERNS=true|false}
${INCLUDE_TEMPLATES=true|false}
Generated Prompt
"Analyze the project's folder structure and create a comprehensive 'Project_Folders_Structure_Blueprint.md' document that serves as a definitive guide for maintaining consistent code organization. Use the following approach:
Initial Auto-detection Phase
${PROJECT_TYPE == "Auto-detect" ? "Begin by scanning the folder structure for key files that identify the project type:
- Look for solution/project files (.sln, .csproj, .fsproj, .vbproj) to identify .NET projects
- Check for build files (pom.xml, build.gradle, settings.gradle) for Java projects
- Identify package.json with dependencies for JavaScript/TypeScript projects
- Look for specific framework files (angular.json, react-scripts entries, next.config.js)
- Check for Python project identifiers (requirements.txt, setup.py, pyproject.toml)
- Examine mobile app identifiers (pubspec.yaml, android/ios folders)
- Note all technology signatures found and their versions" : "Focus analysis on ${PROJECT_TYPE} project structure"}
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 406 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A 6e0c362502ea
folder-structure-blueprint-generator is a skill published in the GitHub repository boshi-xixixi/TraeSkill (262 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 72 tokens to every session and 2,939 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
<skill-name>
A template for defining a coding-agent skill, including its title, trigger situations, overview, workflow, common mistakes, and optional references.
spec-writing
A method for writing a software specification: a document that records decisions, reasons, boundaries, and ways to judge whether implementation succeeded. It first checks whether important unknowns require user clarification or technical research.
onboarding-unknown-codebase
A method for quickly understanding an unfamiliar codebase, meaning a software project whose structure and behavior you do not yet know. It builds a project map by examining overview files, directories, and one main execution path.
commit-message
A guide for writing clear, traceable Git commit messages using the Conventional Commits format, which labels changes such as features, bug fixes, documentation, and refactoring.
clarifying-questions
Guidance for clarifying vague or assumption-heavy requests before making changes.
debugging
A systematic method for finding the underlying cause of a software bug by observing the failure, forming a hypothesis, and testing it.