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 IngvarConsulting/unica --skill code-searchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/IngvarConsulting/unicaWrote 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/ingvarconsulting/unica/code-search)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ingvarconsulting/unica/code-search"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingvarconsulting/unica/code-search/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/ingvarconsulting/unica/code-search"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingvarconsulting/unica/code-search.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 | $0.00052 | $0.03032 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.01213 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00606 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00303 |
Grade A, and why
code-search 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 2d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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.
- 2d ago Changed · +37 lines b1e9065bb846
- 6d ago Changed · +5 lines ee8031c4e83a
- 11d ago Changed · +6 lines ecfdc9744384
- 12d ago Changed · +2 lines c4181eba2544
- 15d ago Changed · +19 lines 2fad705671fb
- 18d ago Changed · +4 lines acf725b0ea0f
- 1mo ago Changed · +5 lines 4d7161859944
- 1mo ago Changed df461d5e6160
- 1mo ago Changed · +6 lines 949ae7317e37
- 1mo ago First seen · 170 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 96976cbc961e
code-search is a skill published in the GitHub repository IngvarConsulting/unica (233 stars, last pushed 2d ago), with no licence file. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 3,032 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
postmortem
Auto-generates a structured postmortem from a completed campaign. Reads the campaign file, telemetry logs, and feature ledger. Produces a documented analysis of what broke, what the safety systems caught, and what patterns emerged. Can also be invoked manually for any incident.
systematic-debugging
4-phase root cause analysis: observe, hypothesize, verify, fix. Enforces investigation before any code changes. Emergency stop after 2 failed fixes. Prevents shotgun debugging and fix cascades.
cfe-diff
A tool for analysing a 1C configuration extension, a package that adds or changes parts of a 1C business application. It can show what the extension contains or check whether its code changes were transferred into the main configuration.
zapier-status
Check the health of your Zapier MCP setup. Three modes — health check (dashboard view), audit (find waste and duplicates), diagnose (systematic troubleshooting). Use when asking "is my MCP working?", "check my tools", "audit my setup", "what's broken?", or "zapier status".
issue-analyze
GitHub Issue and PR review thread deep analysis with Codex blind verdict. Use when: analyzing issue root cause, classifying problems, investigation planning, triaging PR review comments for actionability. Not for: fixing bugs (use bug-fix), code exploration (use code-explore). Output: classified analysis + verdict…
debug
Interactive debugging workflow with hypothesis-driven probe loop. Use when: unknown bugs, script errors, silent failures, troubleshooting. Not for: known bugs (use bug-fix), GitHub issue analysis (use issue-analyze), code understanding (use code-explore). Output: debug report with probe journal + root cause + fix.