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/user-story-generatornpx skills add cwinvestments/memstack --skill user-story-generatorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cwinvestments/memstackWrote 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/cwinvestments/memstack/user-story-generator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cwinvestments/memstack/user-story-generator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cwinvestments/memstack/user-story-generator.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00064 | $0.02429 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.01215 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00486 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00243 |
Grade A, and why
memstack-product-user-story-generator 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 — 293 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
User Story Generator: Generating user stories...
Produces prioritized user stories with Given/When/Then acceptance criteria, story point estimates, story mapping across epics, and MoSCoW prioritization for sprint planning.
Activation
When this skill activates, output:
User Story Generator: Generating user stories...
Then execute the protocol below.
Context Guard
| Context | Status |
|---|---|
| User says "user stories", "write stories", "backlog" | ACTIVE |
| User says "sprint planning" or "acceptance criteria" | ACTIVE |
| User wants to break work into estimable, assignable stories | ACTIVE |
| User wants a full product requirements document | DORMANT: use PRD Writer |
| User wants a detailed spec for one feature | DORMANT: use Feature Spec |
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Why It's Wrong |
|---|---|
| "As a user, I want the system to..." | Stories describe user needs, not system behavior. The "I want to" should be a user action. |
| "Write a story for every edge case" | Edge cases go in acceptance criteria, not separate stories. One story per user intent. |
| "Stories without acceptance criteria" | "Done" becomes subjective. Every story needs testable criteria before sprint planning. |
| "Estimate in hours" | Hours vary by person. Story points measure relative complexity, not calendar time. |
| "50-point stories in the sprint" | If it's bigger than 8 points, split it. Large stories hide unknowns and block the team. |
Protocol
Step 1: Gather Context
If the user hasn't provided details, ask:
- Feature/epic: what area are you writing stories for?
- Personas: who are the users? (roles, permissions, experience levels)
- Existing context: is there a PRD, feature spec, or design to reference?
- Sprint goal: what are you trying to ship this sprint?
- Team capacity: how many story points can the team handle? (helps scope)
Step 2: Identify Epics & Themes
Group stories under epics (large bodies of work):
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 Changed 6ee3d7124bb2
- 2d ago First seen · 293 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A 1d8d5db5ef57
memstack-product-user-story-generator is a skill published in the GitHub repository cwinvestments/memstack (419 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 2,429 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.
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…
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…
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…
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…