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 bravew/trove --skill trove-debuggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bravew/troveWrote 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/bravew/trove/trove-debug)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bravew/trove/trove-debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bravew/trove/trove-debug/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/bravew/trove/trove-debug"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bravew/trove/trove-debug.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 | $0.00032 | $0.00521 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00208 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
trove-debug 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 48 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Session Init
This skill ships Trove conventions. Prefer existing project patterns over generic best practices when they conflict.
If a sibling skill in this plugin matches the request more directly, defer to it. See AGENTS.md (or docs/routing.md in the marketplace) for the per-plugin routing index.
trove-debug
Reproduce, narrow, hypothesize, verify - in that order.
Workflow
- Capture the observed failure and expected behavior.
- Reproduce it with the smallest command, test, fixture, or manual path available.
- Narrow the failing layer by reading code and adding temporary inspection only when needed.
- State one hypothesis at a time.
- Apply the smallest fix that addresses the verified cause.
- Re-run the reproduction and any nearby regression tests.
Root cause, not symptom
Every step from symptom to cause should trace to runtime evidence (a log line, a value, a failing assertion) — not a guess. When a hypothesis is refuted, revert the probe and try the next one; don't stack guards.
- Resist the masking guard. A nil-check or
try/exceptthat silences a crash without explaining why it was nil is a hidden root cause, not a fix. - Restart bugs: suspect state before code. If a bug only appears after a restart, suspect state, not logic — code doesn't change between runs, state does. If clearing a state file restores behavior, the bug is in how that state is written or validated.
- Cheap test target? Hand off to
trove-tddto pin the bug with a failing-test-first cadence before fixing.
Decision Gate: reproduction
Context: A fix without reproduction can mask the bug or create a second one. Question: Do we have a concrete reproduction? Options:
- A. Yes - proceed to narrow and fix.
- B. No - create or request a reproduction first.
- C. The issue is intermittent - collect logs or add targeted instrumentation. Default: B, because verified bugs beat guessed fixes.
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 · 48 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A fb98131f6233
trove-debug is a skill published in the GitHub repository bravew/trove (10 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 521 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-11.
Other skills, from other repositories
testing
Skill validation framework PLUS daily test-suite health and regression intelligence. Validates skill conformance (frontmatter, manifest coverage, resolver coverage). Runs the project test suite in tiered phases (unit / evals / integration / system health), classifies failures, and produces a regression-aware report.
verify
Verify that a change really works before you claim completion.
detect-static-dependencies
ACTIVATION PREREQUISITE: the request or discovered target must explicitly identify C#, .NET, .cs, or .csproj; otherwise stay dormant without invoking this skill. USE FOR: locating System.DateTime.Now/UtcNow, System.IO.File/Directory, System.Environment, HttpClient, Console, or Process usage in C#; auditing C# code for…
dart-downstream-fix
DART Downstream Fix: fix a DART bug reported through gz-physics or Gazebo.
testing-blocks
Use this when you have made AEM Edge Delivery Services code changes to blocks, scripts, or styles and need to validate them before opening a pull request. Covers unit testing for utilities and logic, browser testing with Playwright, linting, and guidance on what to test and how.
experiment-iterative-coder
Iterative code refinement through plan → code → evaluate → refine cycles. Runs lint checks (ruff), tests (pytest), and structured self-evaluation each cycle, then diagnoses failures and refines. Decomposes complex tasks into sequential phases, iterates up to 3 times per phase (10 total). Use when: the main agent…