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 jeffrigby/somepulp-agents/plugin install codebase-healthWrote 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/jeffrigby/somepulp-agents/update-deps)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jeffrigby/somepulp-agents/update-deps"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jeffrigby/somepulp-agents/update-deps/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/jeffrigby/somepulp-agents/update-deps"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jeffrigby/somepulp-agents/update-deps.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 | $0.00042 | $0.04231 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.01692 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00846 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00423 |
Grade A, and why
update-deps scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 299 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Update Dependencies (Orchestrator)
Bring a JavaScript project's dependencies current in two passes: apply everything the declared ranges already permit, then decide per package whether each pending major is safe for this codebase — and report the ones that aren't, with a reason the user can act on.
You are the conductor. major-upgrade-analyzer subagents do the per-major research; you sequence, gate, apply, and verify.
Modes requested (optional): "$ARGUMENTS"
Scope
JavaScript/TypeScript only — npm, pnpm, and yarn (classic and berry), detected from the lockfile or the packageManager field. If the project has no package.json, stop and say so; don't improvise with pip or cargo.
Monorepos are supported: findings are attributed to the workspace that declared them, and upgrades are applied to that workspace rather than the root.
Modes
Split $ARGUMENTS on whitespace:
| Token | Effect |
|---|---|
minors-only |
Apply in-range updates only. No major analysis. |
majors-only |
Skip the in-range pass. Analyze and apply majors against the versions already installed. |
dry-run |
Do all the analysis, change nothing. The approval gate is skipped and the plan is the output. |
sequential |
Analyze majors one at a time instead of in parallel. Slower; useful for debugging a stuck analyzer. |
Anything else is a scope hint passed to every analyzer (e.g. a path, or "src/ only").
Default: both passes, majors analyzed in parallel, one approval gate covering both.
Workflow
The order matters: nothing is written until the single approval gate in step 5. That means the outdated snapshot is taken before any update runs, so the plan and the final report can both name exact from → to versions.
1. Preconditions
- Confirm
package.jsonexists. If not, stop. - Run
git status --porcelain. A dirty tree is not a blocker — this skill never commits and never reverts — but ifpackage.jsonor the lockfile already has uncommitted changes, tell the user before touching them, so they know what's theirs and what's yours. - Detect the toolchain:
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 299 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 6426c7671ff1
update-deps is a skill published in the GitHub repository jeffrigby/somepulp-agents (8 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 4,231 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 2026-09-11.
Other skills, from other repositories
rn-audit
Use when you need a broad, evidence-based React Native or Expo code audit of a project, feature, or diff. It reviews rendering, hooks, lists, native boundaries, and effects without changing source.
craft-audit
The front door to the craft skills — a whole-project production-readiness orchestrator that drives the ten per-domain craft skills (ux, frontend, backend, db, security, infra, observability, testing, lint, ai) instead of auditing one surface at a time. It discovers the project's shape, plans an audit per surface, and…
craft-backend
The Craftsman standard for building and reviewing backend code — API routes, request validation, the authentication boundary, service/business logic, error handling, route rate-limit middleware, third-party integrations, and background jobs. Use this WHENEVER the work touches the server side: adding or reviewing a…
critical-code-reviewer
Rigorously review code or pull requests for correctness, security, accessibility, maintainability, tests, and edge cases. Use when users request a critical code review, want a guided walkthrough of findings, need implementer-facing feedback, or want to prepare, create, or submit a GitHub pull request review.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
triage
Triages a PR comment — from a bot (Copilot, CI) or a human reviewer. Routes to the triagehelper.py helper for identity checks, thread snapshotting, isolated-worktree fixes, and publish/reply/resolve mechanics; you classify the finding and apply a justified fix. --dry-run is fully read-only (investigation and a printed…