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 Gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skills --skill acceptance-scope-controlgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skillsWrote 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/gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skills/acceptance-scope-control)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skills/acceptance-scope-control"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skills/acceptance-scope-control/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/gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skills/acceptance-scope-control"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skills/acceptance-scope-control.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00462 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00185 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00092 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
acceptance-scope-control 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Acceptance Scope Control
Core Principle
Acceptance wording must not exceed the dimensions actually verified. accepted, passed, and closed are scoped receipts, not global status words.
Scope Dimensions
Every acceptance claim must state coverage for:
- route or workflow entry,
- surface or component,
- viewport or environment,
- data source and data shape,
- role or permission assumption,
- assertion level,
- fact source,
- receipt identity,
- skipped checks.
Procedure
- Draft the intended acceptance sentence.
- Break it into implied claims.
- Map each claim to evidence.
- Remove or downgrade any claim without evidence.
- Add explicit uncovered scope and skipped checks.
- Return a bounded receipt.
Verdict Vocabulary
| Verdict | Use When |
|---|---|
accepted_scope_limited |
All stated assertions passed within the listed scope only. |
passed_assertions_only |
Checks passed, but acceptance authority is not established. |
not_ready_for_acceptance |
Required assertions are missing or failed. |
blocked_missing_evidence |
Verification cannot continue without a specific source or artifact. |
needs_same_scope_rerun |
Evidence is stale, inherited, or not aligned to the requested scope. |
Receipt Template
verdict:
covered_routes:
covered_surfaces:
covered_viewports:
covered_data:
assertions:
fact_sources:
skipped_checks:
not_covered:
remaining_risks:
next_owner:
Common Mistakes
- Saying
closedbecause one failing case was fixed. - Saying
acceptedfrom a build, lint, or static scan alone. - Hiding skipped checks in prose.
- Treating an upstream acceptance receipt as current evidence.
- Expanding from one viewport, route, role, or data shape to all variants.
Red Flags
Stop and rewrite the receipt if it contains broad words such as "all", "entire", "complete", "fully", or "no issues" without matching evidence for every dimension.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 72 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 6a648601a343
acceptance-scope-control is a skill published in the GitHub repository Gesondian/ai-collab-governance-skills (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 462 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
alumni-re-hire-tracker
Alumni and re-hire register: former role, last working day, re-hire eligibility, current employer and re-engagement date, as CSV, SQL, JSON Schema or Notion on request. Use for alumni outreach.
process-mapper
Use when a BizOps lead, COO, or process-improvement owner needs to document an end-to-end business process (procurement, employee onboarding, incident handoff, customer-onboarding, claims adjudication) in BPMN-style notation, measure cycle times by stage, surface where work spends most of its time waiting vs. being…
strategic-alignment
Cascades strategy from boardroom to individual contributor. Detects and fixes misalignment between company goals and team execution. Covers strategy articulation, cascade mapping, orphan goal detection, silo identification, communication gap analysis, and realignment protocols. Use when teams are pulling in different…
retro
Facilitate a structured sprint retrospective — what went well, what didn't, and prioritized action items with owners and deadlines. Use when running a retrospective, reflecting on a sprint, creating action items from team feedback, or learning how to run effective retros.
wwas
Create product backlog items in Why-What-Acceptance format — independent, valuable, testable items with strategic context. Use when writing structured backlog items, breaking features into work items, or using the WWA format.
identify-assumptions-new
Identify risky assumptions for a new product idea across 8 risk categories including Go-to-Market, Strategy, and Team. Use when evaluating startup risks, assessing a new product concept, or mapping assumptions for a new venture.