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 drivestream-lab/prayog-skills --skill initiative-feasibilitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/drivestream-lab/prayog-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/drivestream-lab/prayog-skills/initiative-feasibility)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/drivestream-lab/prayog-skills/initiative-feasibility"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drivestream-lab/prayog-skills/initiative-feasibility/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/drivestream-lab/prayog-skills/initiative-feasibility"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drivestream-lab/prayog-skills/initiative-feasibility.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 | $0.00096 | $0.02455 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00048 | $0.01228 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00491 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00246 |
Grade A, and why
initiative-feasibility 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 12d 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 — 161 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Initiative feasibility
Assess whether the dev team's spec slice for this initiative is buildable in this repo as it exists today. Do not implement — flag only.
The spec slice is written by the dev team after reading the PRD. This skill reviews it for gaps, codebase alignment, and architecture governance.
Pattern borrowed from awesome-copilot create-github-issues-for-unmet-specification-requirements (extract → search code → classify). Evaluation discipline aligned with validate-requirements.
NON-NEGOTIABLE
- Never skip a check in references/checks.md. Mark SKIPPED with reason.
- Evidence for every finding — spec quote + repo path (file, symbol, or test name).
- Don't fix — flag. Do not edit product source or product specs unless the user explicitly asks after the report.
- Dual output: chat summary + saved report file + 4-lane triage.
- Run T0–T5 control loop (Gather → Understand → Analyze → Plan → Execute → Verify).
- Verify light source freshness before F1: product-spec header citations
(H1 PRD digest, H2 scope digest, H3 map revision) and tip
continuity; G1 meta head + approval while Gate 1 still applies. See
prayog-skills/references/artifact-write-contract.md. Stop on authority drift. Do not require mid-lane report digests as staleness SSOT. - Every open item must record lane, blocking, owner, status, required-by stage, default-if-deferred, evidence, and resolution reference.
- Read-only content skill. Persist the feasibility report locally and fill
handoff.forgefor/commit-workspace(or Gateflow ForgeClient) onto the same Draft spec PR branch opened by/spec-draft. Do not create branches, commit, push, open PRs, apply labels, create issues, merge, run probes, edit product source, or clean up environments. Gate 2 label staysspec-pending— do not setspec-lgtmduring feasibility. - Do not implement product code. Spec-only artifacts; publication is Forge.
- If a codegraph provider is available (MCP tool matching
prayog-skills/references/codegraph-tool-contract.md, or a local CLI), prefer it for architecture/impact/coverage questions. Always fall back to directsource_rootsreads when unavailable — never block or change outcome selection on its absence.
What ships with it
8 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.
- 12d ago First seen · 161 lines · 96 tokens per session scan A 278ad1fb0461
initiative-feasibility is a skill published in the GitHub repository drivestream-lab/prayog-skills (2 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 96 tokens to every session and 2,455 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…