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 ia-compound-docsgit 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/ia-compound-docs)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/iliaal/whetstone/ia-compound-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iliaal/whetstone/ia-compound-docs/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/ia-compound-docs"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iliaal/whetstone/ia-compound-docs.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 | $0.00055 | $0.00895 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00447 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00179 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00089 |
Grade A, and why
ia-compound-docs 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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
91% identical to compound-docs — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
compound-docs
Process
Single-file architecture -- one markdown file per problem in its symptom category directory (e.g., docs/solutions/performance-issues/n-plus-one-briefs.md), with YAML frontmatter for metadata.
Follow the 7-step documentation capture process. For full details, see documentation-process.md.
- Detect confirmation -- Auto-invoke after "that worked", "it's fixed", etc. Skip trivial fixes.
- Gather context -- Extract module, symptom, investigation attempts, root cause, solution, prevention. BLOCK if critical context missing.
- Check existing docs -- Search
docs/solutions/for similar issues. If found, offer: new doc with cross-reference, update existing, or other. - Generate filename -- Format:
[sanitized-symptom]-[module]-[YYYYMMDD].md - Validate YAML -- Save the draft to a temporary Markdown file, then run validate-frontmatter.sh against it. The validator requires Python 3 and PyYAML; report a missing dependency rather than claiming validation. If invalid, fix the frontmatter and re-run until it passes.
- Create documentation -- Write file to
docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].mdusing resolution-template.md. - Cross-reference -- Link related issues. Detect critical patterns (3+ similar issues).
Capture gate (step 1): capture only if, without this doc, a future engineer reading the final code, tests, comments, CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md, and existing docs or skills would still repeat the mistake or redo the investigation. Skip when any of those already carries the lesson.
Decision Menu
After successful documentation, present and WAIT for user response:
Solution documented
File created:
- docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md
What's next?
1. Continue workflow (recommended)
2. Add to Required Reading - Promote to critical patterns
3. Link related issues - Connect to similar problems
4. Add to existing skill - Add to a learning skill
5. Create new skill - Extract into new learning skill
6. View documentation - See what was captured
7. Other
What ships with it
10 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- agents/openai.yaml 145 B
- assets/critical-pattern-template.md 875 B
- assets/resolution-template.md 3.0 KB
- references/documentation-process.md 6.9 KB
- references/example-scenario.md 1.7 KB
- references/quality-guidelines.md 2.3 KB
- references/yaml-schema.md 3.0 KB
- scripts/validate-frontmatter.py 4.2 KB runs code
- scripts/validate-frontmatter.sh 113 B runs code
- SPEC.md 4.5 KB
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.
- yesterday Changed · +1 lines db82d0115dd6
- 2d ago First seen · 80 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 63dde5f72408
ia-compound-docs is a skill published in the GitHub repository iliaal/whetstone (33 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 895 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 91% identical to compound-docs, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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…
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.
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).
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.
audit-project
Run an iterative multi-agent code audit until critical and high findings are resolved. Use when the user says "audit my code", "find all the bugs", "deep code audit", "iterative review", or "review until clean".