Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to c9r-io/orchestrator. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/c9r-io/orchestrator/main/.claude/skills/ticket-fix/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/c9r-io/orchestratorWrote 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/c9r-io/orchestrator/ticket-fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/c9r-io/orchestrator/ticket-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/c9r-io/orchestrator/ticket-fix/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/c9r-io/orchestrator/ticket-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/c9r-io/orchestrator/ticket-fix.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 | $0.00086 | $0.01470 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00043 | $0.00735 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00294 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00147 |
Grade A, and why
ticket-fix 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 9d 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 — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ticket Fix
Resolve QA tickets end-to-end: read the ticket, classify the issue (false positive / bug / feature gap), get user approval via plan mode, then fix or route appropriately, reset the test environment, re-run QA steps, and clean up the ticket on success.
Workflow
Phase 1: Investigate
-
Discover tickets
- List
docs/ticket/*.mdand confirm which ticket(s) to handle if not specified.
- List
-
Read ticket and validate
- Parse: scenario, steps, expected/actual, environment, SQL checks.
- Reproduce quickly against current implementation.
- If issue no longer reproducible, document why and still run QA verification.
-
Three-way classification (triage)
Compare the ticket’s expected behavior against the actual design intent documented in
docs/design_doc/anddocs/qa/, and classify the ticket:Classification Meaning Action False Positive (误报) Implementation is correct; test expectation is wrong Update QA docs, close ticket Bug (缺陷) Implementation deviates from design intent Fix code, verify, close ticket Feature Gap (功能缺口) Design itself is incomplete; the ticket reveals missing capability Create/update FR, update QA docs, close ticket with FR reference 3a. False Positive (误报)
- The implementation is correct and the ticket stems from incorrect or outdated QA expectations.
- Identify the root cause of the misreport (e.g., outdated expected values, missing preconditions, ambiguous acceptance criteria).
- Use common false-positive patterns as a checklist:
- Missing required authentication/signature headers in QA commands.
- Prerequisites incomplete or ambiguous.
- Environment assumptions wrong for default local setup.
- Test data references entities that do not exist.
- Action: update the relevant QA test document(s) under
docs/qa/to correct expectations, clarify steps, or add notes that prevent future engineers from raising the same false positive. - Ensure updated QA commands are copy-paste-ready for the default local environment.
- Add a troubleshooting table when the failure mode is easy to repeat.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 113 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A c15441f9fba4
ticket-fix is a skill published in the GitHub repository c9r-io/orchestrator (21 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 86 tokens to every session and 1,470 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
dos-self-improve
Run the DOS self-improvement loop: propose a candidate, verify it in an isolated worktree, measure suite/truth/metric gates, and keep only confirmed gains. Use for recursive improvement; use dos-enforce-tune for policy knobs.
fix
Diagnose and fix a bug in an isolated git worktree with reproduce-first, test-first methodology.
cw-dogfood
Use when a Codewhale change needs proving in the real product, or when asked to build/install/dogfood the local binaries: stamped release build, atomic install, fresh-shell verification, and the manual QA that gates cannot cover.
cw-gates
Use before claiming any Codewhale change is done, green, or ready to land: the focused-to-broad verification ladder, the budget checks CI enforces, and the rules for what counts as a passing test.
codew-release-qa-sweep
Use before claiming Codewhale release work is done: run the full gate sweep and list the manual QA targets.
rust-check
Run cargo check on the current Rust project to find compile errors.