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 gleanwork/cursor-plugins --skill similar-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gleanwork/cursor-pluginsWrote 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/gleanwork/cursor-plugins/similar-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gleanwork/cursor-plugins/similar-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gleanwork/cursor-plugins/similar-code/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/gleanwork/cursor-plugins/similar-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gleanwork/cursor-plugins/similar-code.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 | $0.00037 | $0.01046 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00418 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00209 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00105 |
Grade A, and why
similar-code 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to similar-code — 0 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 150 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Similar Code
Search for similar implementations across the organization to find prior art, alternative approaches, or shared solutions.
Determine the pattern or feature from the user's request. If not specified, ask before proceeding.
Core Principles
- Find the blessed path: Look for official/platform solutions first
- Compare approaches: Different solutions have different tradeoffs
- Be skeptical: Not every implementation is worth following
- Quality over quantity: 3 vetted implementations beats 10 random matches
Process
Phase 1: Search for Direct Implementations
Look for the pattern/feature across all repos:
code_search "[topic] implementation"
code_search "[topic] handler OR service"
code_search "[topic] util OR helper"
Phase 2: Search for Alternative Terms
The same concept might be named differently:
code_search "[synonym] implementation"
code_search "[synonym] service"
For example, "rate limiting" might also be called "throttling", "quota", "backpressure".
Phase 3: Find Shared Libraries
Look for centralized implementations:
code_search "[topic] package OR library"
search "[topic] shared library OR common"
Phase 4: Find Related Discussions
Search for design discussions about this pattern:
search "[topic] design doc OR RFC"
search "[topic] best practices OR guidelines"
Phase 5: Vet Each Implementation
For each implementation found, evaluate:
| Test | ✅ Recommended | ⚠️ Acceptable | ❌ Reject |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Clean, tested, well-maintained, follows best practices | Works but has caveats | Hacky, untested, deprecated |
| Maintenance | Commits in past 3 months | Last commit 3-12 months ago | No activity in 12+ months |
| Adoption | Deployed, actively used | Small usage, may have issues | Experiments, abandoned PRs |
| Ownership | Clear maintainer, responds to issues | Works but no clear owner | Orphaned, no maintenance |
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 · 150 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 6aa7f8ab2ce7
similar-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository gleanwork/cursor-plugins (4 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 1,046 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to similar-code, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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"…
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…
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…
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…