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 cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standard --skill safe-changegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standardWrote 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/cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standard/safe-change)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standard/safe-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standard/safe-change/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/cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standard/safe-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standard/safe-change.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00054 | $0.00372 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00149 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
safe-change 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Safe Change
Inputs
- user outcome;
- in-scope behavior/modules;
- explicit non-goals;
- acceptance criteria;
- safety and environment restrictions;
- Git action.
Method
- Trace the current entry point, callers, inputs, outputs, dependencies, and side effects.
- Locate existing code, configuration, tests, and platform facilities before adding anything.
- Define the smallest defensible change and test scenarios.
- Implement only the accepted scope.
- Prefer, in order:
- existing repository behavior;
- language/runtime standard facilities;
- framework/platform features;
- already-installed dependencies;
- direct code;
- a new abstraction or dependency only with current evidence.
- Never simplify away validation, security, privacy, data isolation, error handling, observability, accessibility, migration safety, recovery, or useful tests.
- Add tests at the smallest credible level and cover important boundaries with integration/contract/smoke evidence as applicable.
- Review the complete diff and remove unrelated changes.
- Prepare a test table showing scenario, input/setup, expected, actual, and evidence.
- Use an independent read-only reviewer for non-trivial changes; resolve and recheck blockers.
Output
Report in plain language:
- what changed and why;
- files changed;
- behavior before/after;
- tests and actual outcomes;
- reviewer findings and resolutions;
- unrun validation and residual risk;
- commit/PR identifiers.
Do not expose internal scratchpads or agent transcripts.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 49 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A ca48e631873e
safe-change is a skill published in the GitHub repository cz1993/vibe-coding-repository-standard (21 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 372 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
cli-control
Verify terminal-hosted CLI or TUI behavior with repeatable local evidence. Use for output, prompts, interactive input, signals, hangs, resizing, startup, exit status, or terminal restoration; not for browser, desktop, or Electron interfaces, which belong to ui-control.
test-gap-review
Review whether existing tests and verification credibly prove a scoped behavior contract. Use during validation when evidence may omit important behavior or provide false confidence.
bug-report-reproduce
Reproduce a user, customer, or support-reported problem with synthetic data, prove the cause with a temporary test, record a narrated click-through walkthrough of the symptom, and report what was and was not proven. Use when the user links a bug report, support thread, or ticket and asks to reproduce it, find the…
crap-index-assess
Assess method-level change risk with the Change Risk Anti-Patterns (CRAP) index and recommend focused testing or complexity reduction. Use when the user asks what CRAP means or how to calculate, interpret, or reduce a CRAP score, or when the repository's configured CRAP check covers changed methods; not as a general…
test-design
Design or write reproducible tests matched to behavioral risk before implementation. Use for product behavior; for tooling or infrastructure, use it only when native checks such as linters, validators, dry runs, or plans cannot show the behavior.
behavior-implement
Implement one observable behavior or bug fix with red-green-refactor, writing a focused test that fails first, the minimum code that passes it, and then a behavior-preserving cleanup. Use for product behavior changes; for tooling or infrastructure, use it only when native checks such as linters, validators, dry runs…