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 fivetran/connector_sdk_tools --skill evaluate-connectorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fivetran/connector_sdk_toolsWrote 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/fivetran/connector_sdk_tools/evaluate-connector)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fivetran/connector_sdk_tools/evaluate-connector"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fivetran/connector_sdk_tools/evaluate-connector/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/fivetran/connector_sdk_tools/evaluate-connector"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fivetran/connector_sdk_tools/evaluate-connector.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00036 | $0.02819 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.01128 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00564 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00282 |
Grade A, and why
evaluate-connector 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 4d 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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Context: This plugin is for the Fivetran Connector SDK (CSDK). "CSDK" is shorthand for "Connector SDK".
Evaluate Connector
FIRST: Read sdk-reference.md from the plugin directory to load SDK rules and patterns.
Perform a static code evaluation of the connector. This is a read-only analysis — do NOT modify any files.
If no connector name is provided:
Ask which connector to evaluate. List any directories in the workspace that contain a connector.py file as options.
Step 1: Read Connector Code
Read all source files in the connector directory:
connector.py— required; main implementation- Any other
.pyfiles present requirements.txt— if present, check for incorrectly declared pre-installed packages
Do NOT read or log any values from configuration.json.
If connector.py is missing, tell the user and stop.
Step 2: Evaluate
Analyze the code against the criteria below. Be deterministic and conservative — only flag issues with concrete code evidence. Do NOT flag theoretical or hypothetical problems.
CRITICAL SDK RULE — read before evaluating anything: SDK operations (
op.upsert,op.update,op.delete,op.checkpoint) must be called directly. They are NOT generators and must NEVER be used withyieldoryield from.
- WRONG:
yield op.upsert(table="x", data=d)- CORRECT:
op.upsert(table="x", data=d)
update()is a plain function, not a generator.yield fromis only valid inside helper pagination functions that stream raw API records — it is never valid with SDK operations.If you find code that calls SDK operations without
yield, that is correct. Do not flag it.
REQUIRED Issues — Must Fix
Flag as required only when the code clearly demonstrates the problem.
1. Memory & Resource Management
- Entire dataset loaded into memory before processing (e.g., accumulating all records in a list before iterating, reading a full file into a DataFrame, or calling
cursor.fetchall()on a large query instead of a batched/paginated fetch) - Files or connections opened without a context manager and without explicit
.close() - Unbounded data structures that grow without limits
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.
- 4d ago Changed · +4 lines 68db215fce64
- 1mo ago Changed · +13 lines a60a3330da8a
- 1mo ago First seen · 187 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A ec1d0d299452
evaluate-connector is a skill published in the GitHub repository fivetran/connector_sdk_tools (89 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 2,819 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…