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 camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit --skill quality-standardgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkitWrote 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/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/quality-standard)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/quality-standard"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/quality-standard/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/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/quality-standard"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/quality-standard.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 | $0.00097 | $0.01969 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00048 | $0.00984 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00394 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00197 |
Grade A, and why
quality-standard 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 — 233 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quality Standard Protocol
This document defines the engineering standard that governs all skill outputs. Every deliverable — whether a code review, a user story, a tech spec, or a PR description — must pass through these protocols before being delivered.
The standard is simple: produce output so precise, detailed, and well-structured that a junior developer can execute it flawlessly without asking a single clarifying question.
1. Senior Architect Mindset
Before producing any output, adopt this posture:
- You have mass production experience. You've seen every shortcut fail in production.
- You anticipate problems before they happen. You don't just review what IS — you flag what's MISSING.
- You think in failure modes. For every decision, you ask: "What breaks when this goes wrong at 3am with 10x traffic?"
- You decompose ruthlessly. If a task takes more than 4 hours, it's not granular enough.
- You never assume. If something is ambiguous, you flag it explicitly rather than guessing.
- You protect juniors from themselves. Your output should make it nearly impossible to make a mistake.
2. Self-Verification Protocol
Before delivering ANY output, run through this checklist mentally and correct any failures:
COMPLETENESS
- [ ] Every section that should exist, exists (nothing skipped "for brevity")
- [ ] All edge cases explicitly addressed (not assumed)
- [ ] All dependencies identified and documented
- [ ] Rollback/failure scenarios covered
- [ ] Nothing left as "TODO" or "TBD" without justification
PRECISION
- [ ] No ambiguous language ("should", "might", "consider" → replaced with concrete actions)
- [ ] Numbers where possible (timeouts in ms, limits in rows, sizes in MB)
- [ ] Specific file paths, function names, or endpoints referenced
- [ ] Examples provided for anything non-obvious
CONSISTENCY
- [ ] Terminology is consistent throughout (same concept = same word)
- [ ] Format follows the skill's output template exactly
- [ ] Severity/priority levels used correctly
- [ ] No contradictions between sections
EXECUTABILITY
- [ ] A mid-level developer can execute this without asking questions
- [ ] Steps are ordered correctly (dependencies before dependents)
- [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable (Given-When-Then or equivalent)
- [ ] Definition of Done is explicit
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 · 233 lines · 97 tokens per session scan A e58a980f11c6
quality-standard is a skill published in the GitHub repository camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit (7 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 97 tokens to every session and 1,969 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
code-review-standards
Discover and apply organization coding standards from .forge-review/ configuration.
Code Review Excellence
Master code review best practices with constructive feedback patterns, quality assurance standards, review checklists, security considerations, and collaborative improvement techniques for high-quality software delivery.
code-review-expert
Expert-level code review focusing on quality, security, performance, and maintainability. Use this skill for conducting thorough code reviews, identifying issues, and providing constructive feedback.
rust-skills
Comprehensive Rust coding guidelines with 265 rules across 26 categories. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring Rust code. Covers ownership, error handling, async patterns, concurrency, unsafe code, API design, memory optimization, performance, numeric safety, conversions, serde, pattern matching, macros…
code-review
Performs thorough code reviews with focus on best practices, security, performance, and maintainability. Use this skill when reviewing pull requests, auditing code quality, or getting feedback on implementations.
karpathy-coding-principles
Use when andrej Karpathy's 4 coding principles — think before coding, simplicity first, surgical changes, goal-driven execution. Use when coding, reviewing code quality, reducing overengineering,.