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 staleness-disciplinegit 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/staleness-discipline)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/staleness-discipline"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/staleness-discipline/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/staleness-discipline"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/staleness-discipline.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 | $0.00033 | $0.01418 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00709 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00284 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00142 |
Grade A, and why
staleness-discipline 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Staleness Discipline
Define what "stale" means for a source store in the Mall, and how to remove an entry from sources/supported-stores.json without breaking downstream consumers.
The Mall is read-mostly: downstream agents install from upstream at pinned refs. Pruning a source from the registry stops new catalog entries from that source but does not retroactively break existing installs (those still resolve to their pinned SHA). The discipline below keeps the catalog honest.
When to Use
- Weekly catalog-refresh PR shows a store with degraded signals (no recent commits, broken license signal, archived upstream)
- A reviewer flags a store as no longer fit during PR review
/prune-sourceinvocation
What "stale" means
An entry is stale if any of these apply:
| Signal | Threshold | Where it shows up |
|---|---|---|
| Remote unreachable | bootstrap-sources.cjs clone fails in 2+ consecutive cron runs |
Workflow log |
| Upstream archived | fetch-github-stats.cjs returns archived: true |
scoring/github-stats.json |
| No upstream activity | last_commit older than 18 months |
scoring/github-stats.json + maintenance signal = 0 |
| License changed unfavorably | SPDX id changed to NOASSERTION or to a more restrictive license | scoring/github-stats.json license field |
| Replaced by superior alternative | Another source covers the same domain better with higher trust scores | Per-store trust delta in scoring/trust-audit.md |
| Persistent scan failure | scan-sources.cjs produces 0 plugins for 2+ consecutive runs after previously producing >0 |
catalog/stores/<name>.json plugins array shrinks to 0 |
| Schema or shape drift | normalize-frontmatter.cjs warns or errors on >50% of plugins from that source |
Normalize log |
Classification
| Stale signal | Action |
|---|---|
| Remote unreachable, but upstream still alive on GitHub | Refresh — fix remote URL, don't prune |
| Upstream archived but plugins still valuable | Keep (note archived in PR review); catalog continues to surface them with degraded maintenance score |
| Upstream archived + no activity for years | Prune |
| License changed to unclear or restrictive | Surface in PR review; user decides whether to keep with degraded license signal or prune |
| Replaced by superior alternative | Prune the worse entry; downstream consumers can opt into the better one via --from-store override |
| Persistent scan failure with no clear cause | Investigate pluginDir first — upstream may have renamed the folder. Only prune after fix attempts fail. |
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 · 107 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A caf2d2b75dd3
staleness-discipline is a skill published in the GitHub repository fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall (4 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,418 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
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.