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/hariharapanigrahy/layerkit/layerkit-orchestrate-integrationnpx skills add hariharapanigrahy/layerkit --skill layerkit-orchestrate-integrationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hariharapanigrahy/layerkitWrote 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/hariharapanigrahy/layerkit/layerkit-orchestrate-integration)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hariharapanigrahy/layerkit/layerkit-orchestrate-integration"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hariharapanigrahy/layerkit/layerkit-orchestrate-integration.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 | $0.00029 | $0.01756 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00878 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00351 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00176 |
Grade A, and why
layerkit-orchestrate-integration 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 126 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
layerkit-orchestrate-integration
Master loop: full-stack integration developer. Skills author knowledge and source edits; CLI gates/store.
One pipeline for first-time integrate and contract heal. Semantic work is agent-owned: the AI agent reads docs/OpenAPI/code, decides mappings from evidence, and edits production source files directly.
discover → surfaces → research → design → author → privacy → deletion-first → source-edit → verify → handoff
Heal = human supplies updated OpenAPI/docs → AI agent reads and cites evidence → AI updates existing maps/source/tests in the package → deterministic CLI validates explicit artifacts and package health. The CLI does not understand arbitrary docs, semantic mappings, rename intent, or production source edits.
Strategic Redirect Proof
Before any strategic redirect or large deletion/rewrite, add a small proof step and make it pass. Use the smallest useful proof: an eval, an end-to-end QA check, a contract-heal case, or a before/after acceptance test. Do not continue into broad deletion or rewrite work while the proof is missing or red.
Outcome Checkpoints
Every implementation plan must include explicit outcome checkpoints before source edits start:
- what must pass
- the proof artifact that shows it passed
- the fallback or alternative approach if the design does not validate
Major redirects need proof before implementation, not after. Acceptable proof can be a passing judge, package-level fixture, release checklist item, or concrete before/after behavior. If the proof fails, shrink the change, update existing paths instead, or pause for residual human input.
Primary commands
layerkit cheatsheet
layerkit agent start [--mode full|heal] [--vendor <v>] [--note <text>] # default full
layerkit agent status
layerkit agent next
layerkit agent next # writes memory/runbooks/current-skill-packet.md
layerkit agent mark-done --step <id> --evidence <path>
layerkit proposal validate <file> # read-only structural check
layerkit doctor
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 · 126 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A d2d40ebcf48f
layerkit-orchestrate-integration is a skill published in the GitHub repository hariharapanigrahy/layerkit (8 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,756 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
bcc-plan-spar
BCC align+lock+review PLAN.md for one slice (no product code). Slash: /bcc-plan-spar · chat: bcc:plan-spar · "lock PLAN" · spar the plan. Args: rounds=N (auto-review cap), review=self|subagent|cli|auto|off. Grill until clear enough (no default Q&A quota). Hand off to bcc-clean-cut after human APPROVE.
bcc-throughline
BCC global progress cockpit (plans.md/progress.md/findings.md). Slash: /bcc-throughline · chat: bcc:throughline · "where are we" · reprioritize · resume after /clear. Not for coding or full PLAN grill.
bcc-breaking-coding-chaos
BCC main skill: dual-loop coding workflow (throughline → plan-spar → clean-cut) or quick status+next. Slash: /bcc-breaking-coding-chaos · chat: bcc:breaking-coding-chaos · "run BCC" · "BCC status" · "what next BCC". Needs a real idea (1:1 implement). Args: goal text, or status. May pass plan-spar review budget as…
bcc-clean-cut
BCC minimal implement from locked PLAN.md (ponytail ladder + verify). Slash: /bcc-clean-cut · chat: bcc:clean-cut · "implement PLAN" after human APPROVE. Not for plan grill (use bcc-plan-spar).
chinese-git-workflow
适配国内 Git 平台和团队习惯的工作流规范——Gitee、Coding、极狐 GitLab 全覆盖.
chinese-commit-conventions
中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化.