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 corezoid/corezoid-ai-plugin --skill corezoid-process-tech-writergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/corezoid/corezoid-ai-pluginWrote 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/corezoid/corezoid-ai-plugin/corezoid-process-tech-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/corezoid/corezoid-ai-plugin/corezoid-process-tech-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/corezoid/corezoid-ai-plugin/corezoid-process-tech-writer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 3 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high YARA Match · line 3 YARA rule matched a hack tool or exploit indicator (offensive tools, reconnaissance, privilege escalation, or exploit frameworks).Fix: Remove offensive tool references and exploit code. Legitimate agent skills should not contain penetration testing tools, exploit frameworks, or reconnaissance utilities.
- high Prompt Injection · line 96 Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
- high Prompt Injection · line 101 Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
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 | $0.00128 | $0.01489 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00064 | $0.00745 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00298 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00149 |
Grade A, and why
corezoid-process-tech-writer 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 — 169 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Corezoid Process Tech Writer
Always produce two outputs for every process:
- Markdown documentation file at
.processes/<name>-docs.md - Enriched process JSON (same file,
descriptionfields filled in) at.processes/<name>-enriched.json
Step 0 — Load the process
If the user provides a file path, read it directly. If they provide a process name or ID, use
pull-process to fetch it first.
How to extract information from the process JSON
Inputs
Read the params array. Each entry has:
name— parameter nametype— data typedescr— description (may be empty — infer from context)flags—"required"flag means mandatory;"input"= input param,"output"= output paramregex— validation pattern (document if non-empty)
Outputs
Find all nodes with api_rpc_reply logic in condition.logics:
throw_exception: false→ success response — documentres_datakeys and typesthrow_exception: true→ error response — document what triggers it (node title,exception_reasonif present)
Process flow
Walk scheme.nodes following go entries from the Start node (obj_type: 1):
- Start → node with
idmatching theto_node_idin Start'sgologic - Continue following
goentries to map the happy path - Note branches at Condition nodes or
go_if_constentries - Note error paths via
err_node_idreferences
External dependencies
- API Call nodes (
apilogic): extracturl,method,extra_headers {{env_var[@name]}}references: list all unique variable names used- Code nodes (
api_code): look for referenced services or data transformations - Call Process nodes (
api_rpc): extractconv_idvalues (called process IDs)
Output 1: Markdown documentation
Save to .processes/<process-name-in-snake-case>-docs.md.
Use this exact structure:
# <Process Title>
## Overview
<1-2 sentences: what this process does and when to call it. Be specific about the business purpose.>
## Input Parameters
| Name | Type | Required | Description |
|------|------|----------|-------------|
| field_name | string | Yes | Description from params.descr |
| optional_field | number | No | Description |
<If any field has regex validation, add a "Validation" subsection listing the rules.>
## Output
### Success response
| Field | Type | Description |
|-------|------|-------------|
| response | object | The API response body |
### Error cases
| Error | Trigger condition |
|-------|------------------|
| "Code node error" | JavaScript execution failed in the preparation step |
| "API call error" | External API returned an error or was unreachable |
## How to Call
Example `task_data` with realistic values:
```json
{
"field_name": "example_value",
"optional_field": 42
}
```
## Process Flow
1. **Start** — Entry point, receives the task
2. **<Code Node title>** — <plain English: what this step does>
3. **<API Call / Call Process title>** — <plain English: what is called and why>
4. **<Reply node title>** — <what is returned on success>
5. **Final** — Task stored, process complete
<For error paths, describe them after the happy path:>
**Error path (Code Node failure):** If the preparation step fails, an error reply is returned
with the exception description, and the task ends at the Error node.
## External Dependencies
| Dependency | Type | Variable / URL |
|-----------|------|----------------|
| <service name> | HTTP API | `{{env_var[@variable-name]}}` |
| <process name> | Corezoid process | ID: `<conv_id>` |
## Notes
- <Any timeouts configured via semaphors — e.g. "API call has a 30-second timeout">
- <Rate limiting (max_threads setting)>
- <Any other relevant technical notes>
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 · 169 lines · 128 tokens per session scan A b8c33c0c0ce3
corezoid-process-tech-writer is a skill published in the GitHub repository corezoid/corezoid-ai-plugin (73 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 128 tokens to every session and 1,489 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
stop-that-shit
Keep coding agents focused on requested and necessary work. Use when a request sets a read-only, answer-only, file, action, or stopping boundary; when evidence shows scope creep, speculative hardening, unnecessary hashing or dependencies, repeated audit loops, or valueless delegation; or when the user invokes Stop…
stss
Reduce defensive disclaimers, stacked hedging, and self-protective narration in proposals and decision-facing writing. Use when the user asks to rewrite or audit a proposal, plan, research contribution, executive summary, or similar text for directness. Do not use for ordinary code work or unrelated prose.
superloopy-clone
Use when the user asks for Superloopy clone or asks to clone, rebuild, reverse-engineer, replicate, or copy a website or page into a Superloopy-governed implementation. Triggers on "loopy clone", target URLs plus requests such as "clone this site", "rebuild this page", "make a copy of this website", "pixel-perfect…
superloopy-loop
Use Superloopy's lightweight strict-evidence loop for Codex tasks that need durable progress, criteria, and artifact-backed completion.
superloopy-doctor
Use when diagnosing Superloopy doctor, install, wrapper, plugin cache, hook bootstrap, bundled agents, marketplace, Codex, Claude Code, stale-version, evidence-floor, or host-wiring health problems.
inspect-codex-trajectory
Inspect or show a local Codex task trajectory, including turns, approximate model steps, assistant messages, reasoning summaries, tool calls, failures, compaction, token usage, and timing. Use when the user asks for a trajectory, execution trace, task timeline, slow-tool analysis, visual event ledger, or live…