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/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/lfgnpx skills add gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi --skill lfggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-piWrote 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/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/lfg)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/lfg"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/lfg.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 5.1 | $0.00007 | $0.00466 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00233 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00093 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00047 |
Grade A, and why
lfg 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 5d 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
CRITICAL: You MUST execute every step below IN ORDER. Do NOT skip any required step. Do NOT jump ahead to coding or implementation. The plan phase (step 2, and step 3 when warranted) MUST be completed and verified BEFORE any work begins. Violating this order produces bad output.
-
Optional: If the
ralph-loopskill is available, run/ralph-loop:ralph-loop "finish all slash commands" --completion-promise "DONE". If not available or it fails, skip and continue to step 2 immediately. -
/ce:plan $ARGUMENTSGATE: STOP. Verify that the
ce:planworkflow produced a plan file indocs/plans/. If no plan file was created, run/ce:plan $ARGUMENTSagain. Do NOT proceed to step 3 until a written plan exists. -
Conditionally run
/compound-engineering:deepen-planRun the
deepen-planworkflow only if the plan isStandardorDeep, touches a high-risk area (auth, security, payments, migrations, external APIs, significant rollout concerns), or still has obvious confidence gaps in decisions, sequencing, system-wide impact, risks, or verification.GATE: STOP. If you ran the
deepen-planworkflow, confirm the plan was deepened or explicitly judged sufficiently grounded. If you skipped it, briefly note why and proceed to step 4. -
/ce:workGATE: STOP. Verify that implementation work was performed - files were created or modified beyond the plan. Do NOT proceed to step 5 if no code changes were made.
-
/ce:review -
/compound-engineering:resolve-todo-parallel -
/compound-engineering:test-browser -
/compound-engineering:feature-video -
Output
<promise>DONE</promise>when video is in PR
Start with step 2 now (or step 1 if ralph-loop is available). Remember: plan FIRST, then work. Never skip the plan.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 37 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A d11b742e2c78
lfg is a skill published in the GitHub repository gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi (51 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 466 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
fabric-exec
Troubleshooting and advanced API reference for fabricexec TypeScript programs, dynamic providers, agents, and schema recovery. Routine pi. coding calls are documented by ambient guidance; load this skill only after an argument-shape error or when an advanced surface needs exact contracts.
fabric-fusion
Multi-model deliberation. Two to 8 distinct models answer in parallel with web-capable tools, then a judge compares consensus, contradictions, coverage gaps, unique insights, and blind spots. Act mode runs 1–4 read-only references, then one actor reconciles and executes. Use when the cost of being wrong justifies…
fabric-rlm
Recursively decomposes oversized tasks into bounded child Pi agents with fresh context windows. Use for whole-repo audits, massive-context analysis, and multi-file refactors that do not fit one context.
fabric-schema
Uses Fabric's typed Schema evidence loop and, when enabled, its bounded local-file transaction channel. Use when surprise must void a plan and mutation claims need explicit postconditions.
fabric-workflow
Runs a dynamic Pi Fabric workflow with code-held phases, fan-out, pipelines, structured agents, and best-effort verification. Use for large audits, migrations, parallel research, or explicit workflow requests.
fabric-council
Runs a bounded multi-perspective Pi Fabric council with independent reviewers and best-effort synthesis. Use for architecture choices, plans, reviews, and adversarial cross-checking.