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 iliaal/whetstone --skill diagnose-negativesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/iliaal/whetstoneWrote 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/iliaal/whetstone/diagnose-negatives)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/iliaal/whetstone/diagnose-negatives"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iliaal/whetstone/diagnose-negatives/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/iliaal/whetstone/diagnose-negatives"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iliaal/whetstone/diagnose-negatives.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00137 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00055 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00027 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00014 |
Grade A, and why
diagnose-negatives 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 1mo 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
diagnose-negatives
Read the Codex adaptation, then read the complete maintained workflow before acting. Apply that workflow to the current request with its scope and approval boundaries intact.
Use the text following $diagnose-negatives as the workflow's $ARGUMENTS. When selected from a natural-language request, derive arguments only from the user's stated scope; apply the workflow's missing-argument behavior for anything unspecified.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 11 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 6185ea4cff34
diagnose-negatives is a skill published in the GitHub repository iliaal/whetstone (35 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 137 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-09.
Other skills, from other repositories
rubber-ducky
Use when you've planned a non-trivial change and are about to implement it, finished a complex or multi-file piece of work, just wrote tests, or are stuck on repeated failures — and any time the user says "rubber duck this", "rubber ducky", "get a second opinion", "sanity-check my plan", "poke holes in this", "what am…
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.
anti-patterns
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that greatcto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident).
triage
Triages a PR comment — from a bot (Copilot, CI) or a human reviewer. Routes to the triagehelper.py helper for identity checks, thread snapshotting, isolated-worktree fixes, and publish/reply/resolve mechanics; you classify the finding and apply a justified fix. --dry-run is fully read-only (investigation and a printed…
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.
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.