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 hmj1026/dhpk --skill dhpk-issue-analyzegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hmj1026/dhpkWrote 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/hmj1026/dhpk/dhpk-issue-analyze)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hmj1026/dhpk/dhpk-issue-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hmj1026/dhpk/dhpk-issue-analyze/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/hmj1026/dhpk/dhpk-issue-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hmj1026/dhpk/dhpk-issue-analyze.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 | $0.00077 | $0.01626 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00813 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00325 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00163 |
Grade A, and why
dhpk-issue-analyze 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 4d 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 — 145 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Issue Analyze Skill
Input Types
| Type | Source | Example |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub Issue | Issue number, URL, or description | /dhpk:dhpk-issue-analyze 123 |
| Review Thread | file:line + reviewer comment | /dhpk:dhpk-issue-analyze --triage "src/foo.ts:42 — Use early return" |
When input is a Review Thread:
- Phase 1 skips
gh issue view, uses provided thread data directly - Phase 2 classification uses Review Thread dimensions (see
references/classification.md)
Modes
| Mode | Input Type | Phases Executed | Use Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full (default) | Issue or Thread | 1 → 2 → 2.5 → 3 → 4 | Deep analysis with investigation |
Triage (--triage) |
Review Thread | 2 → 2.5 only | Lightweight classification + verdict (thread data provided inline) |
Triage (--triage) |
GitHub Issue | 1 → 2 → 2.5 | Fetch issue first, then classify + verdict |
When NOT to Use
- Known root cause, fix directly (use
flow-guideand select the Bug branch) - Pure feature development (use
flow-guideand select the Feature branch) - Only need code review (use
change-verdict)
Workflow
- Read the issue with
gh issue view --json ..., or use the supplied review-thread fields. Extract symptoms, reproduction, errors, and file clues. - Classify with classification.md: unfamiliar →
/dhpk:code-trace; regression →/dhpk:code-trace; complex root →/dhpk:code-trace --dual; multiple causes →/dhpk:dhpk-module-design --mode adversarial. - Blind verdict in a fresh read-only isolated reviewer context without the primary classification. Triage mode stops after this phase.
- Investigate unless policy maps the verdict to
DISMISS_VERIFIED. - Report the combined evidence, verdict, root-cause hypothesis, and recommendation.
Investigation Tool Comparison
| Tool | Purpose | Speed | Depth |
|---|---|---|---|
/dhpk:code-trace |
Quick code exploration | Fast | Single |
/dhpk:code-trace |
Track change history | Medium | Single |
/dhpk:code-trace --dual |
Dual confirmation | Slow | Dual-view |
/dhpk:dhpk-module-design --mode adversarial |
Exhaust possibilities | Slowest | Adversarial |
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 145 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 69ce82795654
dhpk-issue-analyze is a skill published in the GitHub repository hmj1026/dhpk (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 1,626 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-05.
Other skills, from other repositories
md-audit
Read-only code quality audit — scan the current working directory for common issues (bugs, dead code, security hotspots, missing error handling) and return a prioritised findings report. No files are edited. Use when asked to "audit the code", "quick audit", "find issues", "code scan", or "what's wrong with this…
audit
Project health audit and health check — architecture, performance, tests, dependencies, code quality. Use when assessing overall project health, before releases, or after refactors.
skeptical-triage
Reusable 3-round self-challenge + arbiter pattern for filtering false positives from findings/verdicts. Use when the cost of a false-positive gate block exceeds the cost of 4 extra LLM turns.
roslyn-query
Query .NET/C# codebases using Roslyn AST analysis via dotnet run file. Use for tracing data flow, auditing API usage, finding pattern violations, or ad-hoc codebase queries.
aster-fix-workflow
Pipe aster review findings into aster fix to generate and apply patches safely, using review --json, fix --findings-json, dry-run inspection, --apply, and permission gating. Use when asked to auto-fix review findings, apply aster's suggested edits, or build a review-then-fix pipeline.
cleanup
Review and clean up the given file(s)/folder(s)/module(s): rate organization, find dead code, duplication, coupling, over-engineering, deep nesting, structural issues, and bad comments, then produce and execute a phased refactor plan. Trigger on "clean up X", "review and refactor X", "rate the code in X", "code…