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 debabsah/analytics-office --skill audit-my-assumptionsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/debabsah/analytics-officeWrote 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/debabsah/analytics-office/audit-my-assumptions)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/debabsah/analytics-office/audit-my-assumptions"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/debabsah/analytics-office/audit-my-assumptions/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/debabsah/analytics-office/audit-my-assumptions"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/debabsah/analytics-office/audit-my-assumptions.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 | $0.00249 | $0.03610 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00100 | $0.01444 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00050 | $0.00722 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00361 |
Grade A, and why
audit-my-assumptions 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 — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
audit-my-assumptions
The colleague who makes you write down what you're taking for granted before you build a quarter of work on top of it — then tries to break the load-bearing ones while it's still cheap.
When to use
Fire FIRST — before you build/derive on it AND before you present/stand behind it. Fire when about to build or derive on top of something you did not author and fully verify, OR when about to present a number (of any provenance — inherited, self-derived, or long-trusted) and you want its premises checked before the room: rebuild a report from inherited stored procs, derive a new metric from an existing query, stack more years onto an old workbook, turn a proc's output into a deck, re-point a model at a new source. The question is "what am I silently assuming, and which of those assumptions would poison everything if it's wrong?" — asked before the build, not after a stakeholder squints at the output.
Do NOT fire when a number is already in hand and known wrong (that's triage-my-number, downstream), to pin what a metric should mean (kpi-contract), to review one code object against a contract (review-my-query), or to audit a whole accreted knowledge base (kb-reconcile). This runs at the front of the work, on the inputs.
This vs. its neighbors. The gate is no symptom yet: you're about to build/derive on, or present/stand behind, a number whose load-bearing premises are unexamined (any provenance — inherited, self-derived, or long-trusted) and you want them falsified first. Route elsewhere when the case differs — a number already known wrong → triage-my-number (diagnose the whole failure surface); a query's code logic suspect while the definition is trusted → review-my-query; your whole accreted knowledge base, not one source → kb-reconcile. Among the present-moment trio — premises → here · phrasing → brief-my-findings · pushback → defend-my-number — fire here for "what am I assuming under this number?" (it can be clean and still wrong); for "how do I write this up?" use brief-my-findings; for "how do I hold up under live challenge?" use defend-my-number.
What ships with it
2 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 · 77 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 68ad4f2c6d80
audit-my-assumptions is a skill published in the GitHub repository debabsah/analytics-office (8 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 249 tokens to every session and 3,610 once invoked, about $0.0010 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
critical-code-reviewer
Rigorously review code or pull requests for correctness, security, accessibility, maintainability, tests, and edge cases. Use when users request a critical code review, want a guided walkthrough of findings, need implementer-facing feedback, or want to prepare, create, or submit a GitHub pull request review.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
pr-review
Comprehensive PR review across six dimensions — cost impact, environment drift, ownership gaps, SOC 2 compliance, deprecated API / version hygiene, and rollback feasibility. Each mode inspects the diff and current file state, reports findings with severity, and recommends concrete fixes. Use when preparing a PR for…
genshijin-review
A compact pull-request review format that writes one actionable finding per line in Japanese or English.
pr-review
Use when the user wants to deeply review a pull/merge request or a local diff — "review this PR", "grill the MR", "stress-test this diff", "deep-dive code review", "code review before merge", or when they name a PR/MR URL, number, branch, commit range (A..B/A...B), tag or SHA. Works on GitHub (gh), GitLab (glab), or a…
shipyard-handoff
Captures session context into .shipyard/HANDOFF.md so the next session can resume without losing progress. Use when the user says "handoff", "save context", or "I'm done for now", or when a long session ends and its state should be recorded.