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/cwinvestments/memstack/gdprnpx skills add cwinvestments/memstack --skill gdprgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cwinvestments/memstackWhat 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 | $0.00121 | $0.03682 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00060 | $0.01841 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00736 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00368 |
Grade A, and why
memstack-business-gdpr 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 274 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
GDPR — Personal-data assessment from the repo...
Scans a repository for evidence of personal data collection, classifies sensitivity under GDPR, decides whether GDPR applies and how critical the obligations are, and reports the required roles, articles to satisfy, and remediation plan.
Activation
When this skill activates, output:
GDPR — Personal-data assessment from the repo...
Then execute the protocol below.
Context Guard
| Context | Status |
|---|---|
| User says "GDPR", "data protection", "privacy compliance" | ACTIVE |
| User asks "do I need GDPR", "does GDPR apply to this project" | ACTIVE |
| User says "DSAR", "right to be forgotten", "cookie consent", "DPA" | ACTIVE |
| User asks about CCPA, LGPD, PIPEDA, UK GDPR | ACTIVE |
| User wants a generic security audit | DORMANT — use owasp-top10 |
| User wants a service agreement or NDA | DORMANT — use contract-template |
| User wants RLS / database access policies | DORMANT — use rls-checker |
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Why It's Wrong |
|---|---|
| "We're a US company so GDPR doesn't apply" | GDPR follows the data subject, not the company. Any EU/UK resident's data triggers it. |
| "Hashed emails aren't personal data" | Hashes are still personal data if reversible or linkable. True anonymisation is irreversible. |
| "Cookie banner with only Accept" | Reject must be equally prominent. Pre-ticked = invalid consent. |
| "Legitimate interest covers everything" | Requires a documented balancing test. Cannot be used for special category data or marketing to children. |
| "We'll get the DPA later" | Article 28 requires a written DPA before processing begins. |
| "72-hour clock starts after we finish investigating" | The clock starts on awareness of a likely breach. |
Disclaimer: Produces a compliance assessment, not legal advice. Engage a qualified DPO or data-protection lawyer before relying on outputs for regulated processing.
Protocol
Step 1: Scan the repo for personal-data signals
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 · 274 lines · 121 tokens per session scan A 2469f5d11a78
memstack-business-gdpr is a skill published in the GitHub repository cwinvestments/memstack (417 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 121 tokens to every session and 3,682 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
ship
Ship workflow: detect + merge base branch, run tests, review diff, bump VERSION, update CHANGELOG, commit, push, and create a PR. Use for an explicit /ship invocation or when the user requests the full ship, release, or deploy workflow. For an ordinary commit, push, or pull-request publishing request, use the built-in…
plan-ceo-review
CEO/founder-mode plan review. Rethink the problem, find the 10-star product, challenge premises, expand scope when it creates a better product. Four modes: SCOPE EXPANSION (dream big), SELECTIVE EXPANSION (hold scope + cherry-pick expansions), HOLD SCOPE (maximum rigor), SCOPE REDUCTION (strip to essentials). Use when…
design-review
Designer's eye QA: finds visual inconsistency, spacing issues, hierarchy problems, AI slop patterns, and slow interactions — then fixes them. Iteratively fixes issues in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying with before/after screenshots. For plan-mode design review (before implementation), use…
plan-eng-review
Eng manager-mode plan review. Lock in the execution plan — architecture, data flow, diagrams, edge cases, test coverage, performance. Walks through issues interactively with opinionated recommendations. Use when asked to "review the architecture", "engineering review", or "lock in the plan". Proactively suggest when…
autoplan
Auto-review pipeline — reads the full CEO, design, eng, and DX review skills from disk and runs them sequentially with auto-decisions using 6 decision principles. Surfaces taste decisions (close approaches, borderline scope, codex disagreements) at a final approval gate. One command, fully reviewed plan out. Use when…
retro
Weekly engineering retrospective. Analyzes commit history, work patterns, and code quality metrics with persistent history and trend tracking. Team-aware: breaks down per-person contributions with praise and growth areas. Use when asked to "weekly retro", "what did we ship", or "engineering retrospective". Proactively…