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 cryndoc/polisade-orchestrator --skill reconcile-docsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cryndoc/polisade-orchestratorWrote 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/cryndoc/polisade-orchestrator/reconcile-docs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cryndoc/polisade-orchestrator/reconcile-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cryndoc/polisade-orchestrator/reconcile-docs.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 Prompt Injection · line 80 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 80 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.
- medium analysis-evasion · line 1 Suspicious Unicode normalization or mixed-script contentFix: Review the flagged content for security risks. Ensure no credentials, secrets, or sensitive data are exposed.
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 | $0.00073 | $0.07390 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.03695 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01478 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00739 |
Grade A, and why
reconcile-docs 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 today.
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 — 444 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/polisade:reconcile-docs [SPEC-XXX | DESIGN-XXX | <путь>] — сверка архитектура ↔ код (best-effort)
Показывает расхождения между тем, что утверждает архитектурный корпус
docs/architecture/, и тем, что видно в коде. Механическая часть —
разрешимость ссылок корпуса (scripts/polisade_reconcile.py anchors,
stdlib-only); сама сверка смысла — работа модели клиента на его токенах.
⚠️ ЧЕСТНАЯ РАМКА — прочитай и повтори пользователю в КАЖДОМ выводе
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Это МНЕНИЕ модели о расхождениях, а НЕ вердикт. │
│ │
│ Корпус best-effort (провенанс INFERRED/GAP), код читает │
│ та же модель, и сверяет смысл она же. Ни гейтов, ни │
│ штампов, ни провенанса CONFIRMED здесь нет — и не │
│ появится оттого, что список выглядит строго. │
│ │
│ Детерминированная сверка «дизайн ↔ код» с провенансом │
│ и блокирующими гейтами — свойство ПЛАТНОГО продукта. │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Что это значит на практике:
- пустой список расхождений = «модель ничего не заметила», а не «архитектура соответствует коду»;
- найденное расхождение = «стоит посмотреть», а не «доказано»: корпус мог устареть, код мог быть переименован, модель могла ошибиться в обе стороны;
- механическая часть (
anchors) проверяет разрешимость ССЫЛКИ — есть ли файл, существуют ли строки, встречается ли символ. Разрешившаяся ссылка ничего не говорит о верности утверждения; - сверка с гарантией (оракул-валидированный провенанс, детерминированные
гейты целостности корпуса, блокирующая проверка) — отдельный платный
продукт; граница описана
в
docs/what-works-without-paid-parts.mdрепозитория Polisade Orchestrator (в поставку плагинаdocs/не входит).
⛔ Запрещено (класс F1 — «отказ способности подан как положительный факт»): подавать вывод как «дрейфа нет», «архитектура подтверждена», «сверка пройдена», рисовать штампы/галочки соответствия и вешать на вывод exit-код как вердикт. Пиши как есть: «модель заметила N расхождений (best-effort, не проверено)».
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.
- today Changed · +102 lines 4ed854be2af6
- 8d ago First seen · 342 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A a8078c8f4615
reconcile-docs is a skill published in the GitHub repository cryndoc/polisade-orchestrator (7 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 7,390 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
audit
This skill should be used when the user asks to "audit spec coverage", "find uncovered modules", "scan for missing specs", "check wyx coverage", "get spec TODO list", "wyx audit", "wyx", or wants a prioritized list of wyx skill commands for uncovered modules. Scans for coverage gaps, pipeline/sync candidates, and…
link-check
Verify @file references in AIWG skills and agents against the linking contract — per-file or corpus-wide, with optional auto-fix.
spawn-reviewers
Spawn and collect the reviewer fleet at stage20spawnreviewers. Consumes spawn.json.spec (the authoritative spawn spec from derive-spawn-spec / derive-static-spec), resolves GRAPHPROJECT, builds per-agent prompts from the per-agent template + role suffixes (Bug Hunter A/B, Unified Auditor, Domain Critics, Impact…
pr-reviewer
Reviews a diff or security scope read-only using evidence-tiered findings, structural and context-error rubrics, and repository review policy. Use when asked to "review my changes", "structural review", "review for AI patterns", or "security audit". For applying fixes use tidy; for UI defects use ui-design.
verify-findings
Dispatch and collect the finding-verifier fleet at stage23verifyfindings (PLN-722). Reads verifymanifest.json (written by stage22bverifyprepare), spawns one falsify-oriented verifier Task per toverify[] entry with mode-specific Task scheduling (GitHub mode dispatches verifiers synchronously; local mode uses parallel…
codex-review
Run Codex to review a plan file and return structured feedback with a verdict. Triggers on: debate loop Codex review rounds. Returns VERDICT:APPROVED or VERDICT:NEEDSCHANGES plus CODEXSESSION token.