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 fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall --skill agent-supply-chaingit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_MallWrote 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/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/agent-supply-chain)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/agent-supply-chain"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/agent-supply-chain/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/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/agent-supply-chain"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/agent-supply-chain.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 | $0.00044 | $0.02454 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01227 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00491 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00245 |
Grade A, and why
agent-supply-chain 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 11d 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
89% identical to agent-supply-chain — 10 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 — 334 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agent Supply Chain Integrity
Generate and verify integrity manifests for AI agent plugins and tools. Detect tampering, enforce version pinning, and establish supply chain provenance.
Overview
Agent plugins and MCP servers have the same supply chain risks as npm packages or container images — except the ecosystem has no equivalent of npm provenance, Sigstore, or SLSA. This skill fills that gap.
Plugin Directory → Hash All Files (SHA-256) → Generate INTEGRITY.json
↓
Later: Plugin Directory → Re-Hash Files → Compare Against INTEGRITY.json
↓
Match? VERIFIED : TAMPERED
When to Use
- Before promoting a plugin from development to production
- During code review of plugin PRs
- As a CI step to verify no files were modified after review
- When auditing third-party agent tools or MCP servers
- Building a plugin marketplace with integrity requirements
Pattern 1: Generate Integrity Manifest
Create a deterministic INTEGRITY.json with SHA-256 hashes of all plugin files.
import hashlib
import json
from datetime import datetime, timezone
from pathlib import Path
EXCLUDE_DIRS = {".git", "__pycache__", "node_modules", ".venv", ".pytest_cache"}
EXCLUDE_FILES = {".DS_Store", "Thumbs.db", "INTEGRITY.json"}
def hash_file(path: Path) -> str:
"""Compute SHA-256 hex digest of a file."""
h = hashlib.sha256()
with open(path, "rb") as f:
for chunk in iter(lambda: f.read(8192), b""):
h.update(chunk)
return h.hexdigest()
def generate_manifest(plugin_dir: str) -> dict:
"""Generate an integrity manifest for a plugin directory."""
root = Path(plugin_dir)
files = {}
for path in sorted(root.rglob("*")):
if not path.is_file():
continue
if path.name in EXCLUDE_FILES:
continue
if any(part in EXCLUDE_DIRS for part in path.relative_to(root).parts):
continue
rel = path.relative_to(root).as_posix()
files[rel] = hash_file(path)
# Chain hash: SHA-256 of all file hashes concatenated in sorted order
chain = hashlib.sha256()
for key in sorted(files.keys()):
chain.update(files[key].encode("ascii"))
manifest = {
"plugin_name": root.name,
"generated_at": datetime.now(timezone.utc).isoformat(),
"algorithm": "sha256",
"file_count": len(files),
"files": files,
"manifest_hash": chain.hexdigest(),
}
return manifest
# Generate and save
manifest = generate_manifest("my-plugin/")
Path("my-plugin/INTEGRITY.json").write_text(
json.dumps(manifest, indent=2) + "\n"
)
print(f"Generated manifest: {manifest['file_count']} files, "
f"hash: {manifest['manifest_hash'][:16]}...")
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 334 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 52545d67f263
agent-supply-chain is a skill published in the GitHub repository fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall (4 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 2,454 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to agent-supply-chain, differing in 10 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
apply-cross-functional-leadership
Use when a manager needs to lead a project or initiative that depends on team members or stakeholders they do not formally manage — to build voluntary cooperation, alignment, and momentum across organizational boundaries through influence rather than authority.
build-psychological-safety
Use when a team leader wants to assess and improve the degree to which team members feel safe to speak up, admit mistakes, ask questions, and disagree — because psychological safety is the strongest predictor of team learning and high performance.
run-performance-improvement-plan
Use when a direct report has a documented pattern of performance falling below role expectations — after informal feedback has not produced sustained change — to create a structured, time-bound plan with clear success criteria before making a continuation decision.
run-underperformance-conversation
Use when a manager first observes that a direct report's performance is declining or falling below expectations — to have an early, direct, non-punitive conversation that names the gap and opens a path to correction before the situation requires formal process.
apply-change-leadership
Use when a manager's team is experiencing a significant organizational change — restructuring, strategy shift, leadership change, layoffs, or major process transition — and needs leadership that maintains team stability, preserves trust, and converts uncertainty into direction.
apply-distributed-team-practices
Use when managing a team where members work in different locations, time zones, or on hybrid schedules — to adapt management practices so remote members have equal access to information, relationships, and advancement opportunities as in-office members.