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 broomva/skills --skill stakeholder-updategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/broomva/skillsWrote 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/broomva/skills/stakeholder-update)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/broomva/skills/stakeholder-update"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/broomva/skills/stakeholder-update/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/broomva/skills/stakeholder-update"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/broomva/skills/stakeholder-update.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 | $0.00076 | $0.00658 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00263 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00132 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
stakeholder-update 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 2mo 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Stakeholder Update
One set of facts → three audience-specific versions.
Workflow
-
Gather the facts — Accept raw project facts from the user. These can be:
- A list of bullet points
- A technical doc or PR description
- A conversation summary
- A vault note path
-
Extract the core — Identify:
- What changed (the facts)
- Why it matters (the impact)
- What's next (the action items)
- Any risks or blockers
-
Generate three versions:
Version 1: Technical (Engineering)
- Lead with what changed technically
- Include relevant code/architecture details
- Reference PRs, commits, or technical docs
- Use precise technical language
- Focus on: implementation details, technical debt, performance metrics
Version 2: Business Impact (Leadership)
- Lead with business outcome
- Translate technical changes to business metrics
- Include timeline and resource implications
- Use clear, jargon-free language
- Focus on: revenue impact, risk reduction, strategic alignment, timeline
Version 3: Customer-Facing (Success Teams)
- Lead with user benefit
- Explain changes in terms of user experience
- Include any action items for customers
- Use friendly, accessible language
- Focus on: what's better for users, when they'll see it, what they need to do
Output Format
## Stakeholder Update: [Topic]
**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Author**: [name]
---
### Technical Version (Engineering)
**TL;DR**: [one sentence]
[2-4 paragraphs with technical detail]
**Action items**:
- [ ] [engineering action]
---
### Business Version (Leadership)
**TL;DR**: [one sentence focused on business outcome]
[2-3 paragraphs, no jargon]
**Key metrics**:
- [metric]: [before] → [after]
**Action items**:
- [ ] [leadership action]
---
### Customer-Facing Version (Success Teams)
**TL;DR**: [one sentence focused on user benefit]
[2-3 paragraphs, friendly tone]
**Customer action required**: [yes/no + details]
**Talking points for support**:
1. [key point to communicate]
2. [key point to communicate]
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 108 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A 5d13733e80e6
stakeholder-update is a skill published in the GitHub repository broomva/skills (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 658 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
stakeholder-update compared with skills from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| stakeholder-updatebroomva/skills | Skill | 5 | 2d ago | MIT | A | 76 | Claude Code |
| claude-md-improveranthropics/claude-plugins-official | Skill | 47k | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 82 | Claude Code |
| agent-platform-model-registrygoogle/skills | Skill | 24k | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 60 | Claude Code, Codex |
| google-cloud-solution-agentic-analytics-spark-knowledge-cataloggoogle/skills | Skill | 24k | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 132 | Claude Code, Codex |
| viteantfu/skills | Skill | 6.1k | 4d ago | MIT | A | 49 | Claude Code, Codex |
| add-analyticsLeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills | Skill | 2.2k | 4d ago | MIT | A | 32 | Claude Code |
| remotion-best-practicesguanyang/open-agent-hub | Skill | 991 | yesterday | MIT | A | 116 | Claude Code |