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/brandonm/ai-code-standards/generating-code-standardsnpx skills add brandonm/ai-code-standards --skill generating-code-standardsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brandonm/ai-code-standardsWhat 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 | $0.00070 | $0.01641 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00821 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00328 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00164 |
Grade A, and why
generating-code-standards 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 2d 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 — 158 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Generating Project Standards
Generate tailored CLAUDE.md files by composing modular fragments based on project inputs (stack, domain, team size, regulated data, CI system).
When to Use
- Starting a new project that needs a CLAUDE.md
- Onboarding an existing repo that lacks engineering standards
- User explicitly asks to generate or create project standards
- Replacing a generic/copy-pasted CLAUDE.md with a tailored one
Do NOT use when:
- User wants to edit a single rule in an existing CLAUDE.md (just edit it directly)
- Auditing compliance against existing standards (use audit-standards instead)
- Updating standards to match a newer template version (use upgrade-standards instead)
Workflow
digraph workflow {
rankdir=TB;
gather [label="1. Gather inputs\n(questionnaire.md)" shape=box];
detect [label="2. Auto-detect what you can\n(package.json, build.gradle, etc.)" shape=box];
confirm [label="3. Confirm inputs with user" shape=diamond];
select [label="4. Select fragments" shape=box];
assemble [label="5. Assemble CLAUDE.md\nfrom template + fragments" shape=box];
existing [label="Existing CLAUDE.md?" shape=diamond];
merge [label="6a. Diff/merge\n(preserve user additions)" shape=box];
write [label="6b. Write new file" shape=box];
review [label="7. Show output for review" shape=box];
gather -> detect -> confirm;
confirm -> gather [label="missing info"];
confirm -> select [label="complete"];
select -> assemble -> existing;
existing -> merge [label="yes"];
existing -> write [label="no"];
merge -> review;
write -> review;
}
Step 1: Gather Inputs
Read questionnaire.md and ask the user each question. Auto-detect answers where possible (Step 2) and present them for confirmation.
Step 2: Auto-Detect
Before asking, try to infer:
| Signal | Look for |
|---|---|
| Language + build tool | package.json, build.gradle, pom.xml, go.mod, Cargo.toml, pyproject.toml, requirements.txt, Gemfile |
| Framework | Dependencies in manifest files |
| CI system | .github/workflows/, .gitlab-ci.yml, Jenkinsfile, .circleci/, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .woodpecker/, .woodpecker.yml |
| Project type | Directory structure, entry points |
| Existing conventions | .editorconfig, .eslintrc, .prettierrc, linter configs |
What ships with it
26 files 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.
- examples/java-gradle-backend.md 9.7 KB
- examples/java-react-fullstack.md 14 KB
- examples/python-data-pipeline.md 9.0 KB
- examples/typescript-react-app.md 12 KB
- fragments/boundaries-solo.md 994 B
- fragments/boundaries-team.md 1.2 KB
- fragments/boundaries.md 2.3 KB
- fragments/data-privacy.md 2.0 KB
- fragments/git-hygiene.md 1.5 KB
- fragments/honesty.md 1.5 KB
- fragments/plan-act-reflect.md 1.6 KB
- fragments/review-gate.md 2.5 KB
- fragments/security-generic.md 2.1 KB
- fragments/security-regulated.md 2.7 KB
- fragments/testing-frontend.md 3.4 KB
- fragments/testing-go.md 3.5 KB
- fragments/testing-java-gradle.md 2.6 KB
- fragments/testing-node.md 2.9 KB
- fragments/testing-python.md 3.8 KB
- fragments/testing-react.md 2.8 KB
- fragments/testing-rust.md 2.7 KB
- fragments/testing-universal.md 2.8 KB
- fragments/testing-vue.md 2.8 KB
- fragments/ui-accessibility.md 2.1 KB
- questionnaire.md 5.9 KB
- template.md 3.3 KB
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 158 lines · 70 tokens per session scan A 1bec7983771e
generating-code-standards is a skill published in the GitHub repository brandonm/ai-code-standards (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 70 tokens to every session and 1,641 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
ring:adopting-lib-commons-huma-wrapper
Adopting the lib-commons/v5 shared Huma (OAS 3.1) OpenAPI wrapper + RFC 9457 problem model (commons/net/http/{openapi,problem}) in a Lerian Go service: wire openapi.New/ServeSpec + problem.Install (central >=500 scrub) on BOTH runtime and spec-gen paths, the per-rail problem.MapError flex seam, and rename-only spec…
ring:applying-composition-patterns
React composition patterns that scale. Avoid boolean prop proliferation by using compound components, lifting state, and composing internals. Use when refactoring components with boolean prop proliferation, building flexible component libraries, or during architecture review. Skip for simple components with 1-2 props…
ring:searching-code
Forensic code search and analysis with optional Chain of Draft (CoD) ultra-concise mode. Five-phase methodology (clarification, planning, execution, analysis, synthesis) with severity assessment. Use for targeted investigation of specific patterns, bugs, or vulnerabilities. Skip for broad architecture mapping (use…
ring:exploring-codebases
Exploring a codebase across phases: scopes the target, detects architecture, components, and layers, deep-dives each discovered perspective, then synthesizes findings into actionable guidance with file:line evidence. Use to understand how a feature or system works before planning changes, or to orient on an unfamiliar…
ring:opening-pull-requests
Open a GitHub Pull Request with automatic base branch detection, scope allowlist enforcement, PR template filling, and post-create base verification. Replaces ring:generating-pr-descriptions. Use after pushing a branch when ready to open a PR. Skip if the branch is not yet pushed or there are uncommitted changes …
ring:cleaning-comments
Cleaning redundant and obvious comments following clean code principles while preserving meaningful documentation. Supports git scope filtering (staged, unstaged, branch, commit-range). Use when code has excessive comments, during code review, or post-refactor cleanup. Skip when reviewing documentation files or…