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 dcramer/agents --skill odiegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dcramer/agentsWrote 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/dcramer/agents/odie)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dcramer/agents/odie"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dcramer/agents/odie/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/dcramer/agents/odie"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dcramer/agents/odie.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00078 | $0.02157 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00863 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00431 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00216 |
Grade A, and why
odie 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 — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyze recurring failure evidence and produce a hard-rule plan: which patterns can be enforced mechanically, which existing tools should enforce them, where the checks should run, and which patterns must remain human judgment.
Contract
- Run when there is recurring or high-signal evidence from transcripts, commit history, Sentry issues, GitHub issues or PRs, CI failures, reviewer feedback, Garfield findings, or an explicit request to codify a repeated failure pattern.
- Treat the source repository as the active repo being improved.
- Prefer evidence that is cross-checked across at least two sources, such as transcript findings plus bugfix commits, or Sentry events plus follow-up PRs.
- Discover existing tooling before recommending new tooling.
- Recommend only hard, mechanically enforceable rules with a clear pass/fail signal.
- Prefer strengthening existing adequate tools over adding duplicate tools; prefer repo-standard or maintained rule frameworks over one-off scripts.
- Prefer existing generalized runners such as
lint,check, ortest. If a separate command is justified, use one aggregate tool runner such aslint:ast-grep, not finding-specific runners such aslint:comments. - Before recommending a custom script, first try to express the exact signal with an existing repo tool, maintained linter rule, structural-search rule, schema check, generated-artifact diff check, or deterministic test helper.
- Recommend custom scripts only for stable repo-specific invariants that cannot be expressed by those frameworks without overmatching and have small valid/invalid fixtures.
- Do not implement checks, install dependencies, edit CI, or change configs unless the user explicitly asks for implementation.
- Do not propose checks for one-off, judgment-heavy, product-requirement, or intentionally accepted tradeoff findings.
- Run a secondary verification pass before final output to remove candidates that still require true human judgment.
- If current tool capabilities, install commands, or migration paths matter and are not already present in the repo, verify them from official docs when possible and cite the source in the handoff.
What ships with it
4 files 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 · 134 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A 4ebe43cf00f6
odie is a skill published in the GitHub repository dcramer/agents (57 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 2,157 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
debug-optimize-lcp
Guides debugging and optimizing Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) using Chrome DevTools MCP tools. Use this skill whenever the user asks about LCP performance, slow page loads, Core Web Vitals optimization, or wants to understand why their page's main content takes too long to appear. Also use when the user mentions…
systematic-debugging
Use when debugging a failing test, build error, or runtime issue that isn't immediately obvious. Guides a 4-phase root cause analysis instead of random fix attempts.
log-error-digest
Analyze log files to troubleshoot errors, identify peak error periods, and produce error clustering, frequency statistics, and time distribution reports. Supports JSON, syslog, and Nginx formats with automatic detection. Use when a user uploads a .log file and asks to analyze errors, find patterns, debug issues, or…
deck-retro
Run a fully local agent-deck retrospective over the user's own transcripts, Recall index and logs. Use when a user wants to find recurring failures or take their own finding from investigation through synthetic reproduction, a user-filed issue, a test-first fix and contributor PR handoff. Also use for weekly usage…
cwv-optimizer
Diagnose and fix Core Web Vitals issues on AEM Edge Delivery Services pages. Goes deeper than generic CWV advice by understanding EDS-specific performance patterns including the 100KB LCP budget, E-L-D loading phases, block rendering behavior, and third-party script impact. Produces specific fixes for LCP, CLS, and…
incident-response-incident-response
Coordinate production incident triage, mitigation, investigation, recovery, and follow-up. Use when responding to outages or other incidents that require structured operational coordination.