headcount is an organization of independently installable Claude Code plugins, each grouping skills for a department such as finance, security, or demand generation. Claude Code users install the departments they need and invoke their skills for specialized work; the catalogue entries are skills and related agent tooling from that organization.
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 cbrock84/headcount --skill contract-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcountWrote 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/cbrock84/headcount/contract-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cbrock84/headcount/contract-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cbrock84/headcount/contract-review/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/cbrock84/headcount/contract-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cbrock84/headcount/contract-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00074 | $0.00784 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00314 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
contract-review 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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Contract review
Not legal advice. This structures a commercial review and identifies what needs qualified counsel. Jurisdiction-specific questions, litigation, employment, financing, and M&A go to a licensed attorney.
Review in risk order
Read for these first. Everything else is negotiable detail.
- Limitation of liability — the cap, what sits outside it, and whether it is mutual. An uncapped indemnity or a carve-out for a broad category can exceed the contract's entire value.
- Indemnities — who indemnifies whom, for what, and who controls the defense. Read the scope against what you actually do; indemnifying for a use you cannot control is the trap.
- IP and data rights — who owns what is created, what rights each side gets to the other's data, and what survives termination. Ambiguity here surfaces years later at the worst moment.
- Term and termination — auto-renewal, notice windows, termination for convenience, and what happens to data and obligations afterward. Missed notice windows are the most common self-inflicted contract loss.
- Payment and change — when payment is due, what triggers a change order, and whether scope can move without price moving.
- Warranties and service levels — what you have committed to deliver, and whether operations can actually deliver it. Commitments that outrun capability are made in contracts and discovered in incidents.
Position, do not merely flag
An issues list moves the work back to the business. For each material point, state: the risk in plain terms, its realistic impact, the preferred position, an acceptable fallback, and what is a genuine walk-away.
Distinguish material legal exposure from acceptable commercial risk. Treating every deviation as a blocker trains people to route around review, which is the worst outcome available.
Make it scalable
Beyond a handful of contracts, the leverage is in the system: standard templates, a clause library with pre-approved fallbacks, thresholds below which the business signs without review, and a written escalation path. Review every contract personally and you become the bottleneck the process was meant to prevent.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · +7 lines 121465931b02
- 1mo ago First seen · 62 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A d75196f9d952
contract-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository cbrock84/headcount (2,081 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 784 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
rotate-creative
Pause fatigued ads and ship fresh creative variants in their place. Works on both Meta and Google Ads. Use when CTR is dropping, frequency is climbing, or the user says "creative is tired" / "let's refresh ads". Always starts new variants paused.
launch-google-search
Launch a complete Google Ads Search campaign — campaign, ad group, responsive search ads, keywords, sitelinks, callouts, and negatives — built paused and ready to review. Use when the user wants to spin up a new Search campaign on Google Ads.
negative-keyword-sweep
Find wasted spend in Google Ads search terms and add negatives at the right scope (account list, campaign, or ad group). Use when the user says "find junk keywords", "stop wasting on bad searches", or wants a search-terms cleanup.
save
Save durable decisions, findings, plans, and implementation knowledge from the visible Codex conversation into a new or existing NeatContext context. Use only when the user explicitly invokes this skill or asks to preserve the current conversation as reusable context.
turbo-pipeline
Use when the user wants a feature built end to end after answering one round of questions and then being left alone — "turbo", "ask me once, then just build it", "I'll answer up front, don't come back to me", "decide the rest yourself". Not for a run that wants a spec approval and no tests (superb:fast-pipeline), one…
bug-fix
Use when a bug, regression, or unexpected behaviour is reported and the user wants it fixed end to end — "why is X broken", "this stopped working after Y", "fix this crash". Also use when a symptom is known but its cause is not. Not for building new behaviour, and not for a change whose cause is already proven.