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 drn/dots --skill prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/drn/dotsWrote 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/drn/dots/pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/drn/dots/pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drn/dots/pr/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/drn/dots/pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drn/dots/pr.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 80 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
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 | $0.00039 | $0.04055 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.01622 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00811 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00405 |
Grade A, and why
pr 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 — 281 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Context
- Current branch: !
git branch --show-current - Git status: !
git status --short
Phase Protocol
This skill participates in a phase chain. Read ~/.claude/skills/_shared/resources/phase-protocol.md for the full protocol.
Before creating the PR: Check .context/phases/ for prior artifacts. If any exist, use them to enrich the PR description:
plan-*.mdorthink-*.md→ use the goal/summary for PR contextbuild-*.md→ use the changes summary and deviationsreview-*.md→ reference review findings and their resolutiontest-*.md→ include test results and coverage metrics
After the PR is created and green: Write a ship-{ts}.md artifact to .context/phases/ (create with mkdir -p .context/phases). The Detail section should include the PR URL, CI status, and any fixes applied. The Handoff section should note the PR number for /merge.
Do NOT git add or commit the ship-{ts}.md artifact (or any .context/ file) into the PR. It is agent-local scratch for cross-phase handoff, not reviewable content — a ship-*.md in the PR diff is a defect reviewers will flag. In every commit step below (Step 1 and Step 4b), stage only the real change; never use git add -A or git add . (they sweep in .context/). As a belt-and-suspenders safeguard, add .context/ to the repo's .gitignore so the artifact can never be swept in.
Your task
Open a PR for the current branch, then loop until CI is fully green and all review comments are addressed. Do not return until the PR is in a mergeable, green state.
If a PR already exists for this branch, skip straight to Step 3 — even if there are no local changes or commits. Your job is to get the PR to a green, mergeable state, not just to open it. Never abort when a PR exists.
Step 0: Check for existing PR
Determine the upstream repo slug (owner/name) — use upstream remote if it exists, otherwise origin. Use gh pr list --repo <owner/repo> --head '<fork-owner>:<branch>' --state open --json number,url to check if a PR already exists. If one exists, note the PR number and skip to Step 3.
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 · 281 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 81af6a789e76
pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository drn/dots (23 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 4,055 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.