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 claudechen95/provenance-mcp --skill skillgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/claudechen95/provenance-mcpWrote 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/claudechen95/provenance-mcp/skill)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/claudechen95/provenance-mcp/skill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/claudechen95/provenance-mcp/skill/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/claudechen95/provenance-mcp/skill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/claudechen95/provenance-mcp/skill.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 | $0.00118 | $0.01209 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00059 | $0.00605 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00242 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00121 |
Grade A, and why
provenance 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 8d 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 — 65 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
provenance
Doctrine: a WHY is quoted from history, or it is "NOT RECOVERABLE" -- never authored from plausibility. The code itself is not evidence of intent; only a commit message, PR description, or issue that states a reason counts.
Procedure
-
Resolve the target.
- If the user gave a
file:line, calltrace_line({ file, line, ref? }). - If the user asked a natural-language question, call
ask_why({ question }). - If the response's
candidatesarray is non-empty, the match was ambiguous -- list the candidates (path, commit, score) and ask the user to pick one rather than guessing which one they meant.
- If the user gave a
-
Read
reason.statusfrom the returned Report."recorded"--reason.textis a direct quote from a cited source (reason.sourceCitation). Quote it verbatim. Do not paraphrase into a stronger or more general claim than the source actually states."unknown"-- no source stated an intent directly. Before giving up, callsearch_history({ query, path, context })with the surrounding topic to check for related historical commits that might carry the rationale. If that still turns up nothing quotable, the verdict's confidence must beNOT RECOVERABLE-- do not infer a reason from what the code appears to do.
-
Never invent. Even if a reason seems obvious from reading the code (e.g. "this is obviously for backwards compatibility"), that is not evidence -- it is a guess. If it isn't cited, it doesn't ship. If you must mention an inference, prefix it explicitly with
[INFERRED]and never let an[INFERRED]sentence stand in as the WHY by itself. -
Render the fixed verdict block below, in this exact order, with no surrounding essay. Every line in EVIDENCE must correspond to one entry in the Report's
citations[].WHY: <one short paragraph; every claim carries a citation> EVIDENCE: <sha> <date> <subject> [one line per citation] <sha> <date> <subject> (via PR #<n> / issue #<n>) [when a citation came from a linked PR/issue] STILL LIVE? yes | no | unknown -- <citation for the HEAD-state check> VERDICT: KEEP | DELETE-CANDIDATE | NEEDS-HUMAN CONFIDENCE: recovered | partial | NOT RECOVERABLE
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 65 lines · 118 tokens per session scan A 060d4ffa0b7f
provenance is a skill published in the GitHub repository claudechen95/provenance-mcp (0 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 118 tokens to every session and 1,209 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
create-pr
Creates a GitHub PR with a Linear-ticket-prefixed title and a decision-led, narrative description for prisma-next. Use when the user wants to create a pull request, open a PR, or submit changes for review.
git-commit
Generate well-formatted git commit messages following conventional commit standards.
mcore-split-pr
Split a PR into multiple PRs to reduce the number of required CODEOWNERS reviewer groups.
contributing
How to contribute to evlog, covering commit and PR conventions, changesets, the Definition of Done, testing rules, and the authored skills that walk through building a new adapter, enricher, framework integration, or map rule. Load this for any question about contributing, opening a PR, or adding something to the…
strict-tdd
Strict RED->GREEN->REFACTOR test-driven development with enforcement. Never write production code before a failing test. Atomic commits per TDD cycle.
git-commit
Creates git commits following Conventional Commits format with type/scope/subject and detailed markdown body. Use when user wants to commit changes, create commit, save work, or stage and commit. Enforces project-specific conventions from CLAUDE.md. Each change type gets its own markdown heading (# emoji + type), with…