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 ForgeyClap/claude-forge --skill grillinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ForgeyClap/claude-forgeWrote 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/forgeyclap/claude-forge/grilling)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/forgeyclap/claude-forge/grilling"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/forgeyclap/claude-forge/grilling/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/forgeyclap/claude-forge/grilling"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/forgeyclap/claude-forge/grilling.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 | $0.00038 | $0.00606 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00242 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00121 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00061 |
Grade A, and why
grilling 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 21d 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
78% identical to grilling — 12 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.
What it actually says
Interview the user relentlessly until you reach a shared understanding. Map this as a design tree: every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it.
Work the tree in rounds. The frontier is every decision whose prerequisites are already settled: the questions you can ask now without guessing at answers you haven't heard yet. Ask the whole frontier in one round: number each question and give your recommended answer. Then wait for the user's answers before the next round.
Format a round like so:
❓ **Q1** - **<question title>**: <question body, might be multiple paragraphs, including multiple choices>
➡️ <your recommended answer>
---
❓ **Q2** - **<question title>**: <question body, might be multiple paragraphs, including multiple choices>
➡️ <your recommended answer>
Each round the user answers reshapes the tree: settled decisions push the frontier outward and unblock questions that depended on them. Recompute the frontier and ask the next round. A question whose answer depends on another question still open in this round belongs to a later round, not this one.
Finding facts is your job, never the user's. When a frontier question needs a fact from the environment (filesystem, tools, etc.), dispatch a sub-agent to find it; don't ask the user for anything you could look up yourself. Don't block on it: a running exploration is an unsettled prerequisite, so only the questions downstream of it wait for the sub-agent to report; ask the rest of the frontier now. The decisions are the user's: put each to them and wait.
The session is done when the frontier is empty: every branch of the design tree visited, nothing left silently assumed. Do not act on it until the user confirms you have reached a shared understanding.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 21d ago First seen · 39 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A a2c409c4cff8
grilling is a skill published in the GitHub repository ForgeyClap/claude-forge (2 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 606 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 78% identical to grilling, differing in 12 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
returns-policy
Answer return, refund, and warranty questions for electronics. Use when the user mentions returns, refunds, RMAs, warranty coverage, damaged items, or opened packaging.
technical-troubleshooting
Provide setup, troubleshooting, and maintenance guidance. Use when the user reports a device that won't power on, connectivity issues, setup questions, overheating, or maintenance concerns.
contribute-spec-fix
Fix a broken OpenAPI spec in jentic-public-apis with an OpenAPI Overlay, validate it (spectral lint + idempotency check), and contribute it back via a PR to the community catalog. Falls back to applying the same overlay to the local Jentic registry if the user can't wait for maintainer approval, and closes the loop by…
jentic
Calls third-party APIs through a Jentic One instance — governed, credential-managed access where the agent searches for an operation, inspects it, and executes it through an audited broker that holds the credentials (identity → discover → check access → execute). Applies when the user asks to call an external API or…
review
Use when operating as the Fabrik Review stage agent. This skill guides code review of an implementation, finding and fixing issues, and ensuring the PR is ready for human review.
implement-comment
Use when operating as the Fabrik Implement comment reviewer. This skill guides applying user-requested code changes during implementation, committing and pushing, and updating the task checklist — without signaling stage completion.