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 Destynova2/cli-code-skills --skill cli-watermarkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Destynova2/cli-code-skillsWrote 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/destynova2/cli-code-skills/cli-watermark)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/destynova2/cli-code-skills/cli-watermark"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/destynova2/cli-code-skills/cli-watermark/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/destynova2/cli-code-skills/cli-watermark"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/destynova2/cli-code-skills/cli-watermark.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 | $0.00140 | $0.07148 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00056 | $0.02859 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.01430 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00715 |
Grade A, and why
cli-watermark 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 — 535 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Optimization: Heavy content lives in
references/. Load on demand.
Language rule: Skill instructions are written in English. When generating user-facing output, detect the project's primary language (from README, comments, docs, commit messages) and produce the output in that language. If the project is bilingual, ask the user which language to use before proceeding.
SECURITY: This skill generates PRIVATE artifacts. NEVER commit watermark secrets, codebooks, or proof files to a public repo. All secrets go in
{project}/.watermark/(gitignored) or in a separate private repo.
CLI Watermark — Steganographic Code Fingerprinting
"Cartographers insert fictional towns to catch map plagiarists. We insert fictional decisions to catch code plagiarists."
Rules for the Watermarker
- L8 first, always. Generate the timestamped commitment BEFORE applying any code-level layer. Anteriority is your strongest asset — if you apply L4 without L8, you have a clever trick but no legal proof.
- Never publish secrets.
secret.envandcodebook.jsonare PRIVATE. OnlyPROOF.md,vectors.json, and.otsfiles can be shared. - Derive, don't invent. Every watermark value (constant, canary, ordering) must be deterministically derivable from the master secret. Ad-hoc choices are indefensible — "I just picked that number" loses in court.
- Watermark the behavior, not the syntax. After 2 rewrites + clean code, only L4/L5/L7/L8 survive. Invest there first; L1/L2/L3 are supplementary signal.
- Defense in depth. No single layer is proof. The legal argument is combinatorial: "What is the probability that N independent signals all match by coincidence?"
- Keep the code clean. Watermarks must be invisible to code review. If a reviewer can spot a canary, an adversary can remove it. The best watermarks look like normal engineering decisions.
- Re-watermark on release. Constants drift, APIs evolve, test vectors need updating. Each release = new L8 commitment + refresh of degraded layers.
- Always have a Plan D². Assume every layer will be attacked. Know in advance which layers survive which attacks, and what your minimum viable proof is when half the layers are gone.
- Protect to defend, never to trap. Watermarks prove authorship — they don't sabotage the adversary's code, don't phone home, don't create legal risk for you. Ethical watermarking = forensic evidence, not DRM.
- Anticipate the adversary's evolution. The threat is not static. Today it's a single AI rewrite; tomorrow it's a specialized de-watermarking tool. Design for the adversary 2 years from now, not today's.
What ships with it
12 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.
- references/academic.md 3.0 KB
- references/crypto-layer.md 2.3 KB
- references/layer-algorithm.md 3.1 KB
- references/layer-behavior.md 3.5 KB
- references/layer-canaries.md 3.1 KB
- references/layer-cfg.md 3.0 KB
- references/layer-commitment.md 3.8 KB
- references/layer-constants.md 2.5 KB
- references/layer-synonyms.md 1.5 KB
- references/layer-vectors.md 2.9 KB
- references/lifecycle.md 14 KB
- references/proof-bundle.md 4.6 KB
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 · 535 lines · 140 tokens per session scan A 9c51cd59d105
cli-watermark is a skill published in the GitHub repository Destynova2/cli-code-skills (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 140 tokens to every session and 7,148 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
workflow
Professional AI programming assistant with structured workflow (Research -> Ideate -> Plan -> Execute -> Optimize -> Review) for developers.
feat
Skill "feat" from UfoMiao/zcf, covering core workflow, 1. input analysis and type determination, 2. classification processing mechanism, 3. key execution principles and quality assurance points.
init-project
Initialize project AI context, generate/update root-level and module-level CLAUDE.md indexes.
argot-check
Score your working changes with argot — flag code foreign to this repo's own patterns (unfamiliar dependencies, APIs, constructs), functions the repo already has, code filed in the wrong place, imports that break the repo's layering, and tests weakened, disabled, or deleted alongside a production change — before…
poly-lint-and-format
Running poly lint / poly fmt — --fix, --format pretty|json|toon, --exclude, --config, exit codes, inline suppression, and the check → read-json → fix → re-check loop.
ensemble-beads-build
Drive an existing bead hierarchy to completion through the full builder, code-review, and close pipeline (Codex skill for /ensemble:beads-build).