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 store-evaluationgit 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/store-evaluation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/store-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/store-evaluation/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/store-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fabioc-aloha/alex_skill_mall/store-evaluation.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 | $0.00022 | $0.01188 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00594 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00238 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
store-evaluation 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 10d 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 — 143 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Store Evaluation
Score a proposed source store against five dimensions. Stores below the threshold are rejected. Stores above are added to sources/supported-stores.json via source-inventory.
When to Use
- A user invokes
/add-sourcewith a candidate store - Periodic re-evaluation of borderline entries (every 6 months)
The Five Dimensions
Score 0–2 per dimension. Maximum score is 10. Threshold for inclusion: ≥ 7.
1. Maintenance Health (0–2)
| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | Repo archived, no commits in 12+ months, last release > 2 years old |
| 1 | Active but low velocity — commits in last 6 months, no recent release |
| 2 | Active maintenance — commits in last 90 days OR active issue triage OR recent release |
2. Adoption Signal (0–2)
| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | Solo project, < 50 stars, no external contributors |
| 1 | Some adoption — 50–500 stars, occasional external contributors |
| 2 | Real adoption — > 500 stars OR multiple maintainers OR sustained external contribution |
(Stars are noisy; weight them with maintenance + license signal.)
3. License Clarity (0–2)
| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | No license, custom restrictive license, or unclear terms |
| 1 | Permissive license but with vendor-specific restrictions |
| 2 | Clean OSI-approved license (MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, ISC, etc.) |
4. Catalog Fit (0–2)
| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | Off-topic — no clear use case for an AI agent that consumes plugins from this Mall |
| 1 | Tangential — useful in narrow scenarios |
| 2 | Direct fit — agents that use this Mall would install plugins from this source in normal workflows |
5. Documentation Quality (0–2)
| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | No README, broken docs, or installation steps unclear |
| 1 | Basic README, install instructions present, examples sparse |
| 2 | Quality README + examples + clear installation + troubleshooting |
Decision
| Total score | Verdict |
|---|---|
| 9–10 | Strong accept — add to the registry |
| 7–8 | Accept — add with a note of any caveats |
| 5–6 | Defer — request more signal (stars, contributors, time) and re-evaluate in 90 days |
| 0–4 | Reject — document the rationale in docs/curation-log.md |
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 143 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 28b85a68a485
store-evaluation is a skill published in the GitHub repository fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall (4 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 1,188 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.