Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add int2t05/engineering-skills/plugin install engineering-skillsWrote 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/int2t05/engineering-skills/oss-polish)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/int2t05/engineering-skills/oss-polish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/int2t05/engineering-skills/oss-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/int2t05/engineering-skills/oss-polish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/int2t05/engineering-skills/oss-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 | $0.00060 | $0.01900 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00950 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00380 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00190 |
Grade A, and why
oss-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 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 — 144 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Open Source Project Polish
One-pass workflow to turn a bare repo into a professional, discoverable open source project. Four phases: README → topics/About → commit-history narrative → trending-repo positioning.
When to use
- Preparing a project for public release or first launch
- Repo has working code but a bare README, missing topics, or no About description
- Want a commit-history narrative (
REPOSITORY_SUMMARY.md+THE_STORY_OF_THIS_REPO.md) - Researching trending repos in a domain for positioning benchmarking
Not for: open source business model or commercialization strategy (use oss-strategy), or general project documentation (use documentation-audit).
Steps
1. Analyze project
- Read entry files (
package.json,go.mod,Cargo.toml,requirements.txt,mkdocs.yml). - Scan source dirs for architecture and key features; note tech stack, target users, unique value.
- Check existing
README.mdand repo metadata. - If
README.mdexists, ask: update in place or back up toREADME-backup.mdfirst?
Result: a one-paragraph summary of what the project does, who it's for, and what's special.
2. Generate README
Produce a professional README.md with sections in this order:
- Title (H1) — repository name.
- Badges — shields.io format. Order: build status → tech stack → hosting → license.
Pick templates from
references/badges.md. Limit 5–10 for readability. Do NOT add a self-link "GitHub repo" badge — readers are already on GitHub. - Live site link — if deployed (GitHub Pages, Netlify, Vercel).
- Overview — 1–3 paragraphs answering what / who / why / unique. Hook a visitor in <15s.
- Site metrics (documentation/educational repos) — for content-heavy repos (docs sites,
courses), run
python references/scripts/collect-site-metrics.py <repo-path>; emit a| Metric | Count |table (markdown files, words, chapters, glossary…). For code-focused repos, skip this step —github_fetcher.pycovers repo metrics instead. - Getting Started — prerequisites, clone, install, build/serve, deploy.
- Repository Structure — concise ASCII tree (10–20 lines), representative not exhaustive.
- Reporting Issues — link to GitHub Issues + bug-report template.
- License — match
LICENSEfile /mkdocs.ymlcopyright; default CC BY 4.0 for educational content (CC BY-SA if share-alike is desired); reserve NC (NonCommercial) only for projects that explicitly restrict commercial use, MIT or Apache-2.0 for code. - Acknowledgements — key dependencies only.
- Contact — maintainer info.
- Optional — Contributing, Citation (BibTeX), Changelog.
What ships with it
7 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 154 B
- references/badges.md 10.0 KB
- references/scripts/collect-site-metrics.py 13 KB runs code
- references/scripts/config.py 1.2 KB runs code
- references/scripts/github_fetcher.py 8.7 KB runs code
- references/scripts/readme_fetcher.py 6.3 KB runs code
- references/scripts/validate-readme.py 11 KB runs code
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 · 144 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 264d89f06151
oss-polish is a skill published in the GitHub repository int2t05/engineering-skills (3 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 1,900 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-workflow
Crear pull requests completas con descripcion, labels y reviewers.
release
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release"…
pr
Comprehensive PR/issue review - analyzes architecture, tests, identifies unrelated changes mixed in, drafts review comment or issue comment. Use when user asks to review a PR, check a PR, look at PR changes, or comment on an issue.
pr-threads-address
Address PR review feedback by systematically working through every unresolved PR review thread on the current branch's PR - analyze each comment, make the requested code changes (with tests where useful), commit, and optionally reply and resolve.
han-release
Cut a Han release: update CHANGELOG.md with the changes since the last release, bump and tag every plugin that changed as {plugin-name}--v{version} so a version-constrained dependency can resolve, and publish a GitHub release crediting every merged pull request and closed issue to the people behind it. Use when…
pr-comment
Post friendly review comments to a GitHub PR — prepare locally, preview, then submit as atomic review. Use when: posting code review comments, giving PR feedback, sending inline suggestions. Not for: reading existing reviews (use load-pr-review), creating PRs (use create-pr), PR status (use pr-summary).