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 daddia/claude-for-strategy --skill change-readiness-assessmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/daddia/claude-for-strategyWrote 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/daddia/claude-for-strategy/change-readiness-assessment)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/daddia/claude-for-strategy/change-readiness-assessment"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/daddia/claude-for-strategy/change-readiness-assessment/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/daddia/claude-for-strategy/change-readiness-assessment"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/daddia/claude-for-strategy/change-readiness-assessment.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 | $0.00051 | $0.01045 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00418 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00209 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
change-readiness-assessment 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 104 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Change Readiness Assessment
When to use
Assess people-side readiness across practice-defined dimensions; identify the binding constraint blocking adoption — not an average score.
What this skill does not do
- Does not map stakeholders — route to
/change-management:stakeholder-impact-mapif segments are missing. - Does not certify go-live — outputs are for human sign-off per practice profile gates.
- Does not invent adoption metrics — no fabricated survey scores or sentiment percentages.
Preconditions
| Input | If missing |
|---|---|
| Initiative context and timeline | Ask scope and target go-live |
| Stakeholder impact map (recommended) | Assess at highest level available; flag gap |
| Practice profile readiness dimensions | Use default set; [PROVISIONAL] |
Provisional mode
Without stakeholder map: assess program-level readiness only; flag [review] on segment-specific claims.
Trust spine
- Confidence bands (
hypothesis-driven-analysis):- High: Dimensions scored with cited evidence; binding constraint named with mechanism.
- Medium: Some dimensions self-reported or single-source; constraint hypothesized.
- Low: Scope or timeline unstated — halt or score scaffold only.
- Failure modes:
- Analytical rigor: Separate "willing" from "able"; don't conflate sponsor agreement with frontline readiness.
- Client confidentiality: Readiness politics sensitive — CONFIDENTIAL header when material.
Workflow
-
Read practice profile — readiness dimensions, RAG definitions, past change history notes.
-
Score each dimension (from profile or defaults: leadership alignment, sponsor visibility, past change fatigue, capacity, skills/training, culture fit, resistance plan in place):
- Evidence — what supports the score (named artifact, interview, observation — not vibes).
- RAG — per profile definitions or Red/Amber/Green with explicit criteria.
- Gap — what would need to be true to move one notch.
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 · 104 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 41a34838b45d
change-readiness-assessment is a skill published in the GitHub repository daddia/claude-for-strategy (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 1,045 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
review
Run the full pre-merge panel: parallel audit and lens reviewers over a diff, consolidated into one severity-ranked verdict.
tdd
Test-driven development, from unit to end-to-end tests. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration or end-to-end tests (Playwright, Cypress). Don't use to backfill tests on existing code (/refactor) or diagnose an unknown bug (/debug).
visual-review
Two visual modes — render a PR diff as an HTML page with each hunk annotated by principle, or check a UI change in a real browser (screenshots, console, network). Use for a visual/HTML diff report, "check the UI", or "screenshot before/after". Don't use for text-only feedback (/code-review), unit tests (/tdd), or full…
to-pr
Gate, push, and open a GitHub pull request on the repo's PR template, then watch CI.
to-tickets
Slice a spec or a ticket into tracer-bullet tickets with blocking edges, published through the repo's tracker: .specs/tickets/ .md by default.
debate
Settle a go/no-go on one risky change against an alternative through an advocate, a skeptic, and a neutral investigator.