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 gtapps/hermitd --skill docs-driftgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gtapps/hermitdWrote 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/gtapps/hermitd/docs-drift)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gtapps/hermitd/docs-drift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtapps/hermitd/docs-drift/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/gtapps/hermitd/docs-drift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtapps/hermitd/docs-drift.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 | $0.00170 | $0.02397 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00068 | $0.00959 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00479 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00240 |
Grade A, and why
docs-drift 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 11d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- docs-drift — 92% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 260 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Docs Drift
Verify that documentation tells the truth about either the changes about to ship or the latest version already shipped.
Keep the audit read-only. Do not edit, commit, tag, push, publish, or release until the user explicitly approves specific findings. Even after approval, never commit or publish from this skill.
Invocation
$docs-driftor$docs-drift unreleased— audit every plugin with a non-empty[Unreleased]section.$docs-drift <plugin-slug>— audit that plugin's unreleased changes.$docs-drift latest— audit the latest reachable release of every tagged plugin.$docs-drift latest <plugin-slug>— audit only that plugin's latest release.
Use unreleased mode by default. Treat "latest version", "latest release", or equivalent wording as latest-release mode.
Typical release order, when the sibling skills are installed:
$release-status → $pre-release-review → $docs-drift → $release
Step 1 — Scope plugins and snapshots
Never mix released and unreleased windows in one claim set.
Unreleased mode
Identify plugins whose [Unreleased] section contains non-blank content:
for p in plugins/*/CHANGELOG.md; do
slug=$(basename "$(dirname "$p")")
awk '/^## \[Unreleased\]/{f=1; next} /^## \[/{f=0} f && NF' "$p" | rg -q '.' \
&& echo "$slug"
done
If the user named a plugin, limit scope to that slug after verifying it exists and has unreleased content. If nothing is in scope, stop with:
No unreleased changes in any plugin — nothing to drift-check.
Use the working tree as the documentation snapshot. Keep incidentally noticed older drift separate as pre-existing debt.
Latest-release mode
Start from all plugins/*/CHANGELOG.md slugs, or only the user-named slug.
Resolve each plugin's refs independently:
EMPTY_TREE=$(git hash-object -t tree /dev/null)
for p in plugins/*/CHANGELOG.md; do
slug=$(basename "$(dirname "$p")")
latest=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 --match "${slug}--v*" HEAD 2>/dev/null || true)
if [ -z "$latest" ]; then
printf '%s\n' "$slug: skipped (no reachable release tag)"
continue
fi
previous=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 --match "${slug}--v*" "${latest}^" 2>/dev/null || true)
printf '%s\n' "$slug latest=$latest previous=${previous:-<empty-tree>}"
done
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 260 lines · 170 tokens per session scan A 994b25fe4ac2
docs-drift is a skill published in the GitHub repository gtapps/hermitd (79 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 170 tokens to every session and 2,397 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-10-02.
Other skills, from other repositories
apex-review
Cross-cutting review of recent work — catches gaps between specialists. Use when asked to "review what we built", "check the work", "pre-launch review", or after completing a significant chunk of work.
spine-review
API and backend code review — REST conventions, auth, validation, error handling, pagination, rate limiting, test coverage. Use when asked to "review this API", "code review", "review backend", or "pre-launch backend check".
github-pr-review
Handles PR review comments and feedback resolution. Use when user wants to resolve PR comments, handle review feedback, fix review comments, address PR review, check review status, respond to reviewer, verify PR readiness, review PR comments, analyze review feedback, evaluate PR comments, assess review suggestions, or…
github-pr-creation
Creates GitHub Pull Requests with automated validation and task tracking. Use when user wants to create PR, open pull request, submit for review, or check if ready for PR. Analyzes commits, validates task completion, generates Conventional Commits title and description, suggests labels. NOTE - for merging existing…
superreview
Review a change set or explicit project scope for intent, correctness, safety, reuse, and maintainability; independently validate findings and produce one report without applying fixes.
init
Opt-in onboarding for the mARC agent team. Scaffolds a per-repo team binding so the team graduates from ephemeral session-memory to persistent, versioned config — without ever writing a file silently. Discovers the repo's org/repo/ project at runtime via gh, prefills {{ agentsdir }}/team.toml, and (optionally) a lean…