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 agentmods add skills/corezoid/simulator-ai-plugin/commitnpx skills add corezoid/simulator-ai-plugin --skill commitgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/corezoid/simulator-ai-pluginWhat 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 | $0.00049 | $0.00701 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00351 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
commit 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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
97% identical to commit — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Commit with auto version bump
This project follows semver. Every commit must include a version bump in:
plugins/corezoid/.claude-plugin/plugin.json.claude-plugin/marketplace.json
Step 1 — Inspect changes
Run in parallel:
git diff HEAD— see what changedgit status— see untracked filesgit log -5 --oneline— see recent commit style
Step 2 — Determine bump type
| Change type | Bump |
|---|---|
| New feature, new tool, new skill, new node type | minor (2.3.x → 2.4.0) |
| Bug fix, doc update, text fix, refactor | patch (2.3.x → 2.3.x+1) |
| Breaking change, major redesign | major (2.x.x → 3.0.0) |
Read current version from plugins/corezoid/.claude-plugin/plugin.json.
Step 3 — Update versions
Update the "version" field in both files to the new version:
plugins/corezoid/.claude-plugin/plugin.json.claude-plugin/marketplace.json
Step 3.5 — Update CHANGELOG.md
Prepend a new entry at the top of CHANGELOG.md (right after the # Changelog heading) following the existing format:
## [<new_version>]
- <bullet summarising what changed — one line per logical change>
Derive the bullets from the staged diff: group related changes into a single readable line each. Keep it concise — one sentence per item.
Step 3.6 — Update README.md
Review the diff for changes that affect README content and update the relevant sections in README.md:
| What changed | What to update in README.md |
|---|---|
New or removed skill (SKILL.md added/deleted) |
What it does table — add/remove the row |
| New or removed MCP tool | MCP Tools table — add/remove the row; Architecture code block if the tool group changes |
| New plugin directory or top-level file | Project structure code block |
| Breaking change to install/config | Installation or Configuration section |
If none of the above apply (e.g. pure bug fix, refactor, doc-only change inside an existing skill), skip this step — do not touch README.md.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 78 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A d1e85ae4954b
commit is a skill published in the GitHub repository corezoid/simulator-ai-plugin (60 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 701 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to commit, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
unslop
Humanize LLM output so it reads like a careful human wrote it. Subtracts AI-isms (sycophancy, tricolons, em-dash overuse, "delve"/"tapestry"/"testament", hedging stacks, tidy five-paragraph shapes), engineers burstiness and calibrated uncertainty, and preserves technical accuracy. Supports intensity levels: subtle…
unslop-file
Humanize natural-language memory files (CLAUDE.md, todos, preferences, docs) by removing AI-isms and adding burstiness while preserving every code block, URL, path, command, and heading exactly. Two modes: --deterministic (fast, regex-based, no API) and LLM (default, calls Claude for rewrite). Humanized version…
unslop-commit
Rewrites commit messages so they sound like a careful human engineer wrote them. Strips AI/marketing slop ("comprehensive solution", "robust implementation", "leverage", "enhance", "seamlessly", "This commit..."). Keeps Conventional Commits format. Subject ≤72 chars (aim ≤50), imperative mood. Body only when "why"…
unslop-help
Quick-reference card for unslop modes, sub-skills, and slash commands. One-shot display, not a persistent mode. Trigger: /unslop-help, "unslop help", "what unslop commands", "how do I use unslop".
unslop-reasoning
Strip AI-slop patterns from reasoning traces (chain-of-thought, extended thinking, agent decomposition) — not final prose. Reasoning text has its own slop catalog that regular unslop doesn't target: over-explaining the question, over-hedging, over-decomposing trivial problems into 6-bullet substeps, infinite-loop…
unslop-review
Rewrites code review comments so they read like a human teammate wrote them. Cuts corporate-AI throat-clearing ("I noticed...", "I was wondering if perhaps...", "It might be worth considering..."). Each comment is direct: location, the issue, a concrete fix. Use when user says "humanize review", "de-slop PR comment"…