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 agentmods add skills/graycodeai/starling/research-constitutional-ainpx skills add GrayCodeAI/starling --skill research-constitutional-aigit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GrayCodeAI/starlingWrote 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/graycodeai/starling/research-constitutional-ai)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/graycodeai/starling/research-constitutional-ai"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/graycodeai/starling/research-constitutional-ai.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00048 | $0.01943 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00971 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00389 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00194 |
Grade A, and why
research-constitutional-ai 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 3d 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
86% identical to constitutional-ai — 18 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 — 287 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Constitutional AI - Harmlessness from AI Feedback
Quick start
Constitutional AI (CAI) trains models to be harmless through self-critique and AI feedback, without requiring human labels for harmful outputs.
Key concept: Models learn to critique and revise their own responses using a "constitution" (set of principles).
Two phases:
- Supervised Learning (SL): Self-critique + revision
- Reinforcement Learning (RL): RLAIF (RL from AI Feedback)
Constitution example:
Principles:
1. Choose the response that is most helpful, honest, and harmless
2. Avoid responses that are toxic, racist, or sexist
3. Prefer responses that explain objections rather than refuse
4. Choose responses that are thoughtful and nuanced
Common workflows
Workflow 1: Supervised learning phase (self-critique + revision)
Step 1: Generate initial responses:
from transformers import pipeline
generator = pipeline("text-generation", model="base-model")
prompts = [
"How do I hack a website?",
"Write something offensive about a group.",
"Help me cheat on my exam."
]
initial_responses = generator(prompts, max_length=200)
Step 2: Self-critique with constitution:
critique_prompt = """
Given the question:
{question}
And the response:
{response}
Constitution:
1. Choose responses that are helpful, honest, and harmless
2. Avoid toxic, racist, or sexist content
3. Explain objections rather than refuse
Identify any ways this response violates the constitution:
"""
critiques = generator(
[critique_prompt.format(q=q, r=r) for q, r in zip(prompts, initial_responses)]
)
Step 3: Revision based on critique:
revision_prompt = """
Question: {question}
Original response: {response}
Critique: {critique}
Please revise the response to better align with the constitution:
"""
revised_responses = generator(
[revision_prompt.format(q=q, r=r, c=c)
for q, r, c in zip(prompts, initial_responses, critiques)]
)
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 287 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 1855e43162ec
research-constitutional-ai is a skill published in the GitHub repository GrayCodeAI/starling (2 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 1,943 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to constitutional-ai, differing in 18 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
constitutional-ai
Anthropic's method for training harmless AI through self-improvement. Two-phase approach - supervised learning with self-critique/revision, then RLAIF (RL from AI Feedback). Use for safety alignment, reducing harmful outputs without human labels. Powers Claude's safety system.
constitutional-ai
Anthropic's method for training harmless AI through self-improvement. Two-phase approach - supervised learning with self-critique/revision, then RLAIF (RL from AI Feedback). Use for safety alignment, reducing harmful outputs without human labels. Powers Claude's safety system.
constitutional-ai
Anthropic's method for training harmless AI through self-improvement. Two-phase approach - supervised learning with self-critique/revision, then RLAIF (RL from AI Feedback). Use for safety alignment, reducing harmful outputs without human labels. Powers Claude's safety system.
constitutional-ai
Anthropic's method for training harmless AI through self-improvement. Two-phase approach - supervised learning with self-critique/revision, then RLAIF (RL from AI Feedback). Use for safety alignment, reducing harmful outputs without human labels. Powers Claude's safety system.
running-coral-experiments
Run and manage CORAL experiments from the operator side — launch agents with coral start (dotlist overrides, model/count, tmux vs local), monitor with coral status / coral log / coral show / the web dashboard, and drive the loop with coral resume (inject instructions, fork from an attempt), coral heartbeat (tune…
deeppapernote
Generate a high-quality deep-reading note for a single paper and write it into an Obsidian-style vault. Use when the user gives a paper title, DOI, URL, arXiv ID, Zotero item, or local PDF and wants a polished Markdown note with strong structure, evidence-based analysis, and figure placeholders.