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 escoffier-labs/skillet --skill refiregit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/escoffier-labs/skilletWrote 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/escoffier-labs/skillet/refire)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/escoffier-labs/skillet/refire"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/escoffier-labs/skillet/refire/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/escoffier-labs/skillet/refire"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/escoffier-labs/skillet/refire.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 | $0.00057 | $0.01171 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00585 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00234 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
refire 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 9d 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.
This is a copy
98% identical to refire — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
refire
A plate comes back to the kitchen. The line's instinct is to fire the same dish again, faster; the chef's job is to find out why it came back first, because a refire of the same mistake comes back twice and now the diner is angrier. This skill is the chef's version of debugging: no fix until the cause of the sendback is known.
Core principle: no fixes without root cause first. A fix that makes the symptom disappear without explaining it is not a fix, it is a scheduled second incident. Violating the letter of this process is violating its spirit.
Find out why it came back
Before any fix, in order:
- Read the error, all of it. The full traceback, the line numbers, the actual message. It frequently names the cause outright.
- Reproduce it. Trigger it reliably with the smallest input you can. Cannot reproduce? Gather more evidence; do not guess.
- Check what changed.
git logandgit diffaround when it broke: recent commits, new dependencies, config or environment drift. Most bugs are young. - Check the documented contract. Schema docs, interface comments, the spec. The difference between the documented behavior and the actual behavior usually points straight at the cause, and the fix must satisfy the contract, not just the failing test.
- Trace to the source. Where does the bad value originate? Who called this with it? Walk up the stack until the origin; the fix lands there, not at the crash site. In a multi-component system, instrument each boundary (what enters, what exits) and run once to see which layer breaks, rather than theorizing across all of them.
- Compare against what works. Find the nearest working sibling (same pattern, same codebase) and list every difference, including the ones that "can't matter".
Then fix it, once
- State the hypothesis. "X is the root cause because Y", written, specific. If you cannot finish that sentence, return to investigation; do not pretend.
- Pin it with a failing test first. The test reproduces the bug and asserts the violated contract, not just the absence of the crash. This is taste's loop applied to a bug; a fix without a test that failed is a fix that cannot prove itself and a regression nobody will catch.
- One minimal change. Test the hypothesis with the smallest change that fixes the cause. One variable. No bundled cleanups, no "while I'm here".
- Verify and read the output. The pinned test passes, the whole suite stays green, the original symptom is actually gone.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 59 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 37eaff903ef2
refire is a skill published in the GitHub repository escoffier-labs/skillet (4 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,171 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 98% identical to refire, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
craft-fix
The Craftsman standard for driving fixes against an existing craft-audit workspace — "fix the findings", "fix SEC-003", "work through the audit", "start the climb". An ACTION skill, not a domain: it picks findings off the master tracker's climb sequence, re-verifies each is still real, gets the user's approval, and…
production-audit
Exhaustive production-readiness audit of any codebase or product. Runs diverse-angle discovery passes until two consecutive passes find nothing new, adversarially verifies every finding against the real code, and reports one flat severity-tagged list with file:line evidence. No summary, no hedging.
spark-engineer
Use when writing Spark jobs, debugging performance issues, or configuring cluster settings for Apache Spark applications, distributed data processing pipelines, or big data workloads. Invoke to write DataFrame transformations, optimize Spark SQL queries, implement RDD pipelines, tune shuffle operations, configure…
log-analyzer
A log-analysis helper that reads application and system logs to find unusual patterns and likely causes. Logs are records of events such as errors, requests, warnings, and service activity.
remove-deadcode
Remove unused code from this project with ultrawork mode, LSP-verified safety, atomic commits. Triggers: remove dead code, dead code, cleanup, remove unused.
Reverse Engineering & Binary Analysis
Binary analysis, assembly interpretation, disassembly, decompilation, firmware RE, and protocol reverse engineering.