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 source-accessgit 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/source-access)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ingvarconsulting/unica/source-access"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingvarconsulting/unica/source-access/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/source-access"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingvarconsulting/unica/source-access.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 | $0.00060 | $0.04057 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.01623 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00811 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00406 |
Grade A, and why
source-access 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.
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.
- yesterday Changed · +1 lines 1ce541387346
- 2d ago Changed · +22 lines 80be1982eb90
- 3d ago Changed · +4 lines c80a667fa2d5
- 8d ago Changed · +3 lines 8cdb5220685d
- 11d ago Changed · +9 lines 0de6a0cf63e4
- 12d ago Changed · +14 lines ef2e58cdc2d1
- 13d ago Changed · +11 lines 2c01d6499617
- 14d ago Changed · +4 lines d8783fddcbfb
- 15d ago Changed · +2 lines 20d3e6ce4028
- 16d ago First seen · 229 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A cdfe185e76f1
source-access is a skill published in the GitHub repository IngvarConsulting/unica (233 stars, last pushed 2d ago), with no licence file. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 4,057 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 2026-09-03.
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.