Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to CorridorTech/PoseCap. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/CorridorTech/PoseCap/main/.agents/skills/ad-drift/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/CorridorTech/PoseCapWrote 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/corridortech/posecap/ad-drift)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/corridortech/posecap/ad-drift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/corridortech/posecap/ad-drift/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/corridortech/posecap/ad-drift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/corridortech/posecap/ad-drift.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 | $0.00067 | $0.01589 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00636 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00318 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00159 |
Grade A, and why
ad-drift 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 2mo 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<background_information> Read-only. Produces a drift list comparing the repo's operational docs against what the code actually does. Writes nothing — the user decides whether to fix the spec or the code. </background_information>
Step 2 — run checks.
AGENTS.md drift (if present):
- Stack — does the listed stack match
package.json/pyproject.toml/Cargo.toml/go.mod/ equivalent? - Setup/build/test commands — do they match
package.json#scripts,Makefile, orpyproject.toml? - Quality gates — do referenced hook configs exist (
.husky/,.pre-commit-config.yaml,.github/workflows/)? - Repository layout — do referenced directories exist?
- Pre-approved commands — anything in the list missing from the toolchain?
ARCHITECTURE.md drift (if present):
- Layers and boundaries — do the named directories exist? Sample 1–2 files per layer; are imports respecting the stated boundaries?
- Patterns — sample one handler / one repository / one entry point. Do they follow the documented pattern?
- No
## Active ADRssection — ARCHITECTURE.md must not duplicate thedoc/adr/directory index per ADR-0030 §2.
ADR drift (if doc/adr/ exists):
- Numbering — gaps or duplicates in
doc/adr/NNNN-*.md? - Status field — every ADR has one of
proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN. - Superseded chains — every "superseded by ADR-NNNN" target exists.
Spec drift (if doc/specs/ exists; structural integrity only — does NOT deep-audit spec text against code, deferred per ADR-0011):
- Numbering — gaps or duplicates in
doc/specs/NNNN-*.md? - Status field — every spec has one of
draft | accepted | shipped | superseded by SPEC-NNNN. - Superseded chains — every "superseded by SPEC-NNNN" target exists.
- Reciprocity — every task with non-empty
Spec refpoints to a spec that exists; every accepted/shipped spec has at least one entry in its Related → Tasks list. - No checkbox UI — per ADR-0030 §1, Spec is decision-record (not tracking). Functional Requirements / Non-functional Requirements / Success Criteria must use plain bullets, not
- [ ]checkboxes; implementation tracking lives in per-Spec tasks. - Status / task aggregate alignment — when every task referencing a spec is done, the spec's Status should be
shipped. A spec with all tasks done but Status: accepted is drift between work-unit completion and feature-level claim.
Documentation discipline drift (WORKFLOW.md §2 / ADR-0008). Audit narrative documents — README.md, AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, DESIGN.md, and prose pages under doc/ that are not lifecycle-managed artifacts under doc/product/, doc/specs/, doc/adr/, or doc/tasks/:
- Emoji — any present? Rule 3 forbids emoji anywhere (docs, code, comments, commits, skill outputs).
- Dates / version stamps /
DRAFTmarkers / changelog blocks in narrative documents — Rule 2 forbids these. Lifecycle-managed artifacts underdoc/product/,doc/specs/,doc/adr/, anddoc/tasks/are exempt. - Business context first — does the first paragraph answer why the document exists, before what and how? Rule 4.
- Scope duplication — does the document copy material that is canonically owned by another file? Rule 5 requires linking, not copying.
- Speculation — phrases like "we might", "in the future", "could be added", or roadmaps without an ADR / task reference. Rule 1 forbids unfounded plans.
Source code (sample, not exhaustive — flag findings, not every match):
- Orphan
TODO/FIXME— Rule 7. A reference to a GitHub Issue or adoc/tasks/NNNN-*.mdtask file makes it not orphan. - Commented-out code blocks — Rule 7. Removed code lives in git history.
Single-responsibility drift (ADR-0030 / WORKFLOW §2 rules #9–#12):
- Definition-layer tracking UI (Rule #9) — grep
^- \[ \]/^- \[x\]inside AGENTS.md, WORKFLOW.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, GUIDELINES.md, CONTEXT.md,doc/product/*.md. Definition documents must not carry per-item checkbox UI. Fenced code-block examples (PR-body templates, etc.) are illustrative, not pillar tracking. - Directory-as-index duplication (Rule #10) — flag sections that re-state another layer's index:
## Active ADRsinside ARCHITECTURE.md or AGENTS.md; multi-bullet## Architectural Principlesdigests paraphrasing each ADR; PRD## Related → ADRsbullet lists enumerating the kit's ADR ledger. - Kit-state in WORKFLOW.md (Rule #12) — grep
ADR-[0-9]{4}in WORKFLOW.md. Universal philosophy must not cite kit-specific ADR numbers (downstream installs lackdoc/adr/). Literature citations and genericdoc/adr/references are allowed. - Cross-references that are decoration (Rule #11) — sample inline
per ADR-NNNNrefs in narrative documents and apply the load-bearing test: deletion leaves the surrounding statement intact → decoration; flag.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 76 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 3173ac52d8c8
ad-drift is a skill published in the GitHub repository CorridorTech/PoseCap (265 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 1,589 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
debug-optimize-lcp
Guides debugging and optimizing Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) using Chrome DevTools MCP tools. Use this skill whenever the user asks about LCP performance, slow page loads, Core Web Vitals optimization, or wants to understand why their page's main content takes too long to appear. Also use when the user mentions…
systematic-debugging
Use when debugging a failing test, build error, or runtime issue that isn't immediately obvious. Guides a 4-phase root cause analysis instead of random fix attempts.
log-error-digest
Analyze log files to troubleshoot errors, identify peak error periods, and produce error clustering, frequency statistics, and time distribution reports. Supports JSON, syslog, and Nginx formats with automatic detection. Use when a user uploads a .log file and asks to analyze errors, find patterns, debug issues, or…
cwv-optimizer
Diagnose and fix Core Web Vitals issues on AEM Edge Delivery Services pages. Goes deeper than generic CWV advice by understanding EDS-specific performance patterns including the 100KB LCP budget, E-L-D loading phases, block rendering behavior, and third-party script impact. Produces specific fixes for LCP, CLS, and…
incident-response-incident-response
Coordinate production incident triage, mitigation, investigation, recovery, and follow-up. Use when responding to outages or other incidents that require structured operational coordination.
ci-fixer
CI failures - read error, minimal fix, verify.