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 inkatze/planwright --skill polishgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/inkatze/planwrightWrote 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/inkatze/planwright/polish)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/inkatze/planwright/polish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/inkatze/planwright/polish/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/inkatze/planwright/polish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/inkatze/planwright/polish.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 | $0.00106 | $0.03075 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00042 | $0.01230 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00615 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00308 |
Grade A, and why
polish 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 7d 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 — 247 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/polish
The autonomous act-then-review loop (REQ-E2.1, D-12): repeat the /self-review
pass against the feature branch until it drains every action disposition and
only irreducible Needs-human-judgment forks remain, then hand off a
projection of the audit record and the file holding it in full. Polish is
local-only per the invariants below: nested /self-review passes reuse
the base pinned at pre-flight, and the skill owning PR creation carries its
checklist to the draft PR.
Doctrine
Resolve and read the same rule docs as /self-review, listed in the manifest
below, via scripts/resolve-rule-doc.sh <doc-name> through the core root
chain. Their definitions govern wherever this skill names a concept.
Issue one plain command per Bash call (doctrine/plugin-script-invocation.md).
If a rule doc does not resolve, halt with a clear message naming the missing
doc and the chain consulted.
Doctrine manifest (per doctrine/instruction-hygiene.md; run-start docs
load before work begins, point-of-use at the named step):
Doctrine: run-start discovery-rigor Doctrine: run-start validation-rigor Doctrine: run-start finding-categorization Doctrine: run-start gate-wiring Doctrine: point-of-use research-rigor (the nested /self-review pass's finding-validation) Doctrine: point-of-use refactor-instinct (the nested /self-review pass's refactor filter) Doctrine: run-start security-posture Doctrine: run-start proportionality
Invocation modes
Read the literal flag --nested from $ARGUMENTS at the start of the run:
- Standalone (no flag): on exit, present the handoff to the human.
- Nested (
--nested): a parent skill (typically/execute-task, which runs Polish as its convergence step per REQ-E1.4) invoked the loop in-session and receives the handoff; the parent owns the PR body the audit record lands in.
The loop behaves identically in both modes. Nested invocation is in-session skill composition (REQ-E2.2, D-13): one session, one context, hooks fire once per actual tool call, not once per skill layer. Record the resolved mode in every iteration summary.
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.
- 7d ago Changed · +10 lines 44f23e19fad6
- 14d ago Changed 42222cc2392e
- 16d ago Changed 5867fbff78ef
- 19d ago Changed · -1 lines cfb9f9634d40
- 27d ago Changed · +23 lines · +12 tokens per session bdd50400fd3b
- 1mo ago Changed · -23 lines 62febab4b11a
- 1mo ago Changed · -2 lines 3e2ba0280d1d
- 1mo ago First seen · 240 lines · 94 tokens per session scan A 2721de80f394
polish is a skill published in the GitHub repository inkatze/planwright (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 106 tokens to every session and 3,075 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
defect-hunting
Use when reviewing code, auditing an app, writing a guard rule or test, or certifying any threshold/constant/formula. Finds the defects a diff review structurally cannot see — the second write path, the mis-calibrated constant, the rule that cannot fail. Triggers from code-reviewer, /app-audit, qa-engineer…
accessibility-gate
Use as a pass/fail gate on any diff with a user-facing surface — by code-reviewer during review, by qa-engineer during the test pass, and by any IC before claiming a UI ticket done. This is the gate the plan called for instead of an accessibility specialist role. Triggers whenever a screen, component or state changes.
github-pr-workflow
Prepare a GitHub pull request from a feature branch — branch hygiene, commit shape, title/body, verification notes, screenshots for UI work, and replies to review comments.
improve
Autonomous quality improvement loop. Scores a target against a rubric, selects the highest-leverage axis, attacks it, verifies, documents, and loops. No pre-planning between iterations — each loop re-scores from scratch.
triage
GitHub issue and PR investigator. Pulls open issues/PRs, classifies them, searches the codebase for root cause or reviews contributed code, proposes fixes with file:line references, and optionally implements fixes. Use for investigating GitHub issues and reviewing PRs; do NOT use for general code review unrelated to…
review
5-pass structured code review — correctness, security, performance, readability, consistency.