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 writinggit 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/writing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/iliaal/whetstone/writing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iliaal/whetstone/writing.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00067 | $0.00940 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00470 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00188 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00094 |
Grade A, and why
writing 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 8d 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 — 75 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Human Writing
Core Principles
- Active voice: "We shipped the fix" not "The fix was shipped"
- Specific over vague: "Cut reporting from 4 hours to 15 minutes" not "Save time"
- Simple words: "Use" not "utilize", "help" not "facilitate", "start" not "initiate"
- Positive form: Say what it is, not what it isn't — "Ignore" not "Do not pay attention to"
- Confident: Cut "almost", "very", "really", "quite", "arguably"
- Concrete: Name the thing, state the number, cite the source
- Omit needless words: "Because" not "due to the fact that"; "Now" not "at this point in time"; "Can" not "has the ability to"
- Use contractions: "don't", "won't", "it's", "they're" — uncontracted forms are a major AI tell
AI Patterns — Kill on Sight
Vocabulary: delve, crucial, pivotal, foster, leverage, tapestry, testament, underscore, vibrant, landscape (abstract), interplay, multifaceted, enhance, enduring, garner, showcase, Additionally, seamless, robust, cutting-edge, groundbreaking, nestled, renowned
Structural tells:
- Rule of three: forced triads ("streamline, optimize, and enhance")
- Negative parallelism: "It's not just X — it's Y"
- Superficial -ing phrases: "ensuring reliability", "showcasing features"
- Copula avoidance: "serves as", "stands as", "boasts" — use "is", "has"
- Synonym cycling: four names for the same thing in four sentences
- False ranges: "from X to Y" where X and Y aren't on a meaningful scale
- Formulaic challenges: "Despite X, Y continues to thrive"
Formatting tells:
- Em dash overuse — replace most with commas or periods
- Mechanical bold on every other phrase
- Emoji-decorated headers
- Bolded-header bullet lists (Thing: explanation of thing)
- Title Case In Every Heading Word — use sentence case instead
Filler (compress or delete):
- "In order to" → "To"
- "Due to the fact that" → "Because"
- "It is important to note that" → delete
- Generic conclusions: "The future looks bright" → state the actual plan
- Excessive hedging: "It could potentially possibly be argued" → "The policy may affect outcomes"
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 75 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A b269f001bc8b
writing is a skill published in the GitHub repository iliaal/whetstone (33 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 940 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-responder
Use when receiving feedback on code you implemented, responding to reviewer comments, deciding which review suggestions to implement, or pushing back on incorrect review feedback.
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…
pr-sweep
Use when you want to sweep all open pull requests across all repos, triage their status, run code reviews on unreviewed PRs, merge what's ready, fix quick blockers, and produce a full status report. Trigger when the user says "check my PRs", "close out open PRs", "what's the status of my PRs", "sweep my PRs", "PR…
review
Use when user invokes /review to review code changes. Also triggers on "review my code", "check this PR", "look at my changes". Accepts a PR number (e.g. /review 123), a path filter (e.g. /review src/auth/), or no argument (reviews current branch vs base). Produces structured per-file review with severity labels…
open-pr
Use when wrapping up a development task and getting a PR ready — runs local tests, creates a PR (if one doesn't exist) with a structured description template, conducts a code review via the review skill, and checks CI status with quick fixes. Trigger when the user says they're done with a feature, want to open a PR…
claude-friends
Ask AIs from other families to review something before you commit to it. User-triggered, never automatic. Fires when the user signals uncertainty or asks for another perspective: 'ask a friend', 'second opinion', 'sanity check', 'cross-check', 'am I missing something', 'stress-test this', 'critique this', 'devil's…