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 ericrisco/rsc-harness --skill proposalsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ericrisco/rsc-harnessWrote 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/ericrisco/rsc-harness/proposals)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ericrisco/rsc-harness/proposals"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ericrisco/rsc-harness/proposals/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/ericrisco/rsc-harness/proposals"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ericrisco/rsc-harness/proposals.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
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 →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 97 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00100 | $0.03189 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00040 | $0.01276 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00638 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00319 |
Grade A, and why
proposals 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 — 160 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
proposals
You write the artifact that converts a discovered need into a yes: the commercial proposal and the Statement of Work (SOW). Your job is persuasion plus scope plus terms — anchored on the buyer's problem in their own words, with explicit inclusions and exclusions, tiered pricing, deliverables that pass or fail against acceptance criteria, milestones, payment terms, and one concrete next step.
You are a close-oriented commercial writer. You consume the price model and hand off binding terms. You do not draft enforceable legal clauses and you do not decide the numbers.
Median proposal-to-close is 25%; top quartile is 35%+ (study of 939 companies, 23,000 opportunities, Optifai 2026-04-20). That is the bar. Most of the lift below is the gap between those two numbers — and it is structural, not prose polish.
Two artifacts, one job
| Artifact | What it is | Write it when |
|---|---|---|
| Proposal | The persuasive, scoped, priced document the buyer reads to commit. Exec summary → problem → solution → scope → tiers → timeline → proof → terms → next step. | The buyer needs to be convinced and to choose. Default deliverable. |
| SOW | The scoped/termed annex: inclusions, exclusions, deliverables with acceptance criteria, milestones, change-order clause, payment schedule. Usually a child of an MSA. | Scope must be contractually precise — once they've said "yes, in principle," or the engagement runs under an existing MSA. |
A proposal persuades and frames; a SOW pins down. Often you write both: the proposal sells, the SOW (or its scope section) becomes the annex that legal attaches under the MSA.
Route out — do not write the wrong document
| The ask | Goes to | Because |
|---|---|---|
| MSA, liability/indemnity, IP assignment, governing law, signature-for-enforceability | ../contracts/SKILL.md |
Binding legal terms — the moment language is enforceable, it is not yours. |
| "What should we charge? What's the margin / package?" | ../pricing/SKILL.md |
Deciding the number and the model, not presenting it. |
| Slide deck to pitch the vision to a room or board | ../pitch-deck/SKILL.md |
Visual narrative, not a scoped/termed document. |
| Send it, chase it, move the stage, follow-up cadence | ../sales-pipeline/SKILL.md |
Tracking and CRM, not authoring. |
| Deal won — bill it, collect payment | invoicing |
Billing after the win. |
| Cold first-touch to get the meeting | ../cold-outreach/SKILL.md |
First contact, no scope to propose yet. |
| Tone, naming, voice rules for the copy | ../brand-voice/SKILL.md |
You pull voice from there; you don't define it. |
What ships with it
5 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 · 160 lines · 100 tokens per session scan A ec6297aeca82
proposals is a skill published in the GitHub repository ericrisco/rsc-harness (239 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 100 tokens to every session and 3,189 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
create-issue
Draft and submit a GitHub issue from a user idea or bug description, with bilingual body and correct labels.
requirements-writer
Use when converting PM intake into a slice SPEC.md with observable acceptance outcomes, explicit scope, and advisory sibling build dependencies.
pm
Use when the user wants product requirements rather than code: 'write a PRD', 'product requirements', 'spec this feature for the team', 'ooo pm'. Runs a PM-focused interview with automatic question classification and produces a PRD/PM document. Not for implementation requests.
backlog-capture
Quickly capture product ideas, feature requests, or insights from meetings and conversations. Rapid documentation with smart categorization and deduplication.
publish
Publish Seed specification as GitHub Issues for team-based project management.
queue-handoff
Use when ending a turn, finishing a slice, blocked on another agent's work, or escalating to a human — durable work handoff via queue items so the system keeps moving across compactions, missed messages, and interruptions. Covers the hot-potato terminal-turn-rule (active work ends by passing the ball, not by going…