Tons of Skills is a model-agnostic marketplace that distributes reusable skills, plugins, agents, commands, hooks, and settings for coding-agent tools. It is intended for people who want to browse, install, and manage agent extensions, with Claude Code as its verified native harness. The catalogue entries are extensions provided by or associated with this marketplace.
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 jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace --skill tracegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplaceWrote 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/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/trace)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/trace"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/trace/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/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/trace"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace/trace.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00084 | $0.04703 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00042 | $0.02351 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00941 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00470 |
Grade A, and why
trace 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 13d 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 — 343 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Trace
Root cause, not symptom. Never patch over a bug without understanding why it happened.
All agents inherit the session model. Reviewers and Debuggers bold-labeled; Workers plain.
Per-Step Agent Map (DOCTRINE rule 12)
Every substantive step dispatches at least one Agent. Atomic steps (per DOCTRINE 12.2.8) are a single Worker → Reviewer pair with no independent angles to fan out.
| Step | Status | Workers | Reviewers | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 — Reproduce | Atomic (12.2.8) | Searcher | Reviewer | Runs if repro missing; single Worker→Reviewer pair |
| 2 — Gather evidence | Atomic (12.2.8) | searcher specialist × 3 |
Reviewer | 3 parallel Searchers → single Reviewer; one Worker-group→Reviewer pair |
| 3 — Hypothesize | Atomic (12.2.8) | debugger specialist |
Reviewer | Single Debugger (5 Whys + ranked hypotheses); may fan out Step 4 across hypotheses (rule 18) |
| 4 — Verify | 2 sub-phases | Implementer × N | Debugger · Reviewer | 4a: parallel Implementers → Reviewer; 4b: Debugger re-evaluation → Reviewer |
| 5 — Fix at root | Atomic (12.2.8) | Implementer × N | Reviewer | N Implementers (one per file) → Reviewer; single Worker-group→Reviewer pair |
| 6 — Regression test | Atomic (12.2.8) | Writer | Reviewer | Single Writer → single Reviewer; no parallel angle |
| 7 — Memory + final | Atomic (12.2.8) | Writer | Reviewer | Single Writer → integration Reviewer; no parallel angle |
Step 1 — Reproduce
Atomic — single Searcher → Reviewer pair (DOCTRINE 12.2.8). No parallel angles: artifact retrieval is a single-scope search when the symptom is unknown.
If the user supplied a stack trace, test name, or log snippet — skip the Worker dispatch entirely (Step 1 is then trivially fulfilled by existing input; proceed to Step 2).
Otherwise dispatch Searcher — locating bug reproduction in recent changes/tests.
Collect: failing test name or command, error message, stack trace, log lines, recent commits touching the affected surface.
What ships with it
5 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.
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.
- 13d ago First seen · 343 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A cf9da11a65a1
trace is a skill published in the GitHub repository jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace (2,717 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 4,703 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
spec-code-review
Structured code review for bugs, regressions, tests, and standards. Report-only by default; apply fixes only when the current user or upstream caller explicitly requests review-and-fix. mode:agent is always report-only.
pr-review
Review Cool Workflow pull requests or branch diffs. Use when Codex must inspect code changes for bugs, regressions, FreeBSD/POLA violations, missing tests, generated artifact drift, release-contract risk, or CI implications, and return findings first with file/line citations.
systematic-debugging
Methodical debugging instead of random changes.
nazgul:heartbeat
Run one Nazgul automation-heartbeat tick — triages the work inbox and auto-starts the next objective if idle. Opt-in and default-off; fired by an optional Claude Code native scheduled agent (routine) or run by hand. Use when asked to "run a heartbeat tick", "check the inbox", or to test/debug the heartbeat.
adversarial-reviewer
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
code-review
Reviews code for bugs, security issues, and best practices.