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 human-avatar/skills-for-humanity --skill s4h-emotional-stakes-mappinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/human-avatar/skills-for-humanityWrote 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/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-emotional-stakes-mapping)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-emotional-stakes-mapping"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-emotional-stakes-mapping/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/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-emotional-stakes-mapping"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-emotional-stakes-mapping.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00072 | $0.01250 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00625 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00250 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00125 |
Grade A, and why
s4h-emotional-stakes-mapping 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 9d 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 — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Emotional Stakes Mapping
People argue about positions. They care about stakes. Addressing the stated position while missing the real stake is the most common reason negotiations, decisions, and alignment efforts fail. This skill maps the gap between the two — not by guessing, but by working systematically through what each party stands to lose if the outcome goes against them.
Your Process
Step 1: List Stakeholders Identify every party with a meaningful stake in the outcome — including silent ones who will be affected but aren't in the room. Passive non-participants often have the highest stakes; they just have no forum to name them.
Framing check: Confirm the specific situation and its stakeholders before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual conflict or decision being mapped and the parties involved — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the situation, the core tension, and the parties involved]. Is that right?"
- Header: "Framing"
- Options:
- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
Step 2: Stated Position What is each stakeholder explicitly asking for, pushing toward, or resisting? Keep this behaviorally specific — "they want sign-off authority" not "they want control." Surface the precise ask.
Step 3: Real Fear What are they actually afraid of losing? Common real fears: status within their organisation, control over resources they currently hold, credit for outcomes they've invested in, relevance if the change makes their expertise obsolete, relationships that depend on the current arrangement, safety from blame if things go wrong. Fears drive positions — find the fear beneath the ask.
Step 4: Minimum Conditions for Agreement What would need to be true — not just what would help, but what is the floor — for each stakeholder to feel safe enough to say yes? The minimum condition is often surprisingly specific once the real fear is named: "I need to be cited as a contributor" or "I need a fallback option if this fails."
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 122 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A bd25f8a316de
s4h-emotional-stakes-mapping is a skill published in the GitHub repository human-avatar/skills-for-humanity (223 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 72 tokens to every session and 1,250 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
decision-making-under-pressure
Provides practical habits for making better decisions faster -- reframing problems before solving them, knowing when to stop deliberating, balancing intuition with analysis, resisting 'just this once' compromises, and breaking overthinking cycles. Use when facing a high-stakes choice with incomplete data, sensing that…
flow-state
Optimizes individual and team productivity using Csikszentmihalyi's flow state framework, covering the conditions for flow (clear goals, immediate feedback, challenge-skill balance), the four-stage flow cycle, and organizational flow design. Use when auditing personal or team focus time, diagnosing productivity loss…
stoic-right-action
Applies Stoic ethics of right action to entrepreneurial decision-making, covering the four cardinal virtues (courage, justice, temperance, wisdom), ethical leadership under pressure, and the discipline of choosing the harder right over the easier wrong. Use when facing ethical dilemmas in business, building a…
bakeoff
Turn one decision into a judged tournament of solutions, then pick the best. Given a problem, design choice, or a suggestion you want cross-verified, it generates diverse candidate solutions, auto-derives the evaluation dimensions for THAT problem (so you don't have to know what to score on), judges every candidate…
balanced-scorecard
Translate strategy into metrics across Financial, Customer, Internal Process, and Learning & Growth perspectives.
customer-journey-map
Visualize every touchpoint a customer has with a product or service — stages, actions, emotions, pain points, opportunities.