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 Jerrylalala/compound-engineering --skill setupgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Jerrylalala/compound-engineeringWrote 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/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/setup)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/setup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/setup/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/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/setup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/setup.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 | $0.00024 | $0.01331 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00532 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00266 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00133 |
Grade A, and why
setup 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.
This is a copy
89% identical to setup — 114 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Compound Engineering Setup
Interaction Method
If AskUserQuestion is available, use it for all prompts below.
If not, present each question as a numbered list and wait for a reply before proceeding to the next step. For multiSelect questions, accept comma-separated numbers (e.g. 1, 3). Never skip or auto-configure.
Interactive setup for compound-engineering.local.md — configures which agents run during /ce:review and /ce:work.
Step 1: Check Existing Config
Read compound-engineering.local.md in the project root. If it exists, display current settings summary and use AskUserQuestion:
question: "Settings file already exists. What would you like to do?"
header: "Config"
options:
- label: "Reconfigure"
description: "Run the interactive setup again from scratch"
- label: "View current"
description: "Show the file contents, then stop"
- label: "Cancel"
description: "Keep current settings"
If "View current": read and display the file, then stop. If "Cancel": stop.
Step 2: Detect and Ask
Auto-detect the project stack:
test -f Gemfile && test -f config/routes.rb && echo "rails" || \
test -f Gemfile && echo "ruby" || \
test -f tsconfig.json && echo "typescript" || \
test -f package.json && echo "javascript" || \
test -f pyproject.toml && echo "python" || \
test -f requirements.txt && echo "python" || \
echo "general"
Use AskUserQuestion:
question: "Detected {type} project. How would you like to configure?"
header: "Setup"
options:
- label: "Auto-configure (Recommended)"
description: "Use smart defaults for {type}. Done in one click."
- label: "Customize"
description: "Choose stack, focus areas, and review depth."
If Auto-configure -> Skip to Step 4 with defaults:
- Rails:
[kieran-rails-reviewer, dhh-rails-reviewer, code-simplicity-reviewer, security-sentinel, performance-oracle] - Python:
[kieran-python-reviewer, code-simplicity-reviewer, security-sentinel, performance-oracle] - TypeScript:
[kieran-typescript-reviewer, code-simplicity-reviewer, security-sentinel, performance-oracle] - General:
[code-simplicity-reviewer, security-sentinel, performance-oracle, architecture-strategist]
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 · 175 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 5bd9aeb8bcc6
setup is a skill published in the GitHub repository Jerrylalala/compound-engineering (6 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 1,331 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to setup, differing in 114 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
tech-debt
Track, categorize and prioritize technical debt across the codebase — scans for debt indicators, maintains a register.
pr-review-triage
Watch open PRs, check CI status, review staleness, merge conflicts, and unanswered review comments. Produces a prioritized watchlist.
issue-creation
Trigger: issue creation, bug reports, feature requests, or issue approval. Create and triage GitHub issues from repository evidence.
systemic-issue-triage
Trigger: new issue, bug report, triage, backlog, issue flood, community report, root cause, dead-end, blocked user. Attack issues by root class, never one-by-one; fixes must shrink the system, not grow it.
spec-kitty-runtime-review
Review runtime-owned outputs using the Spec Kitty review workflow surface, then direct approval or rejection with structured feedback. Triggers: "review this work package", "check runtime output", "approve this step", "review WP", "is this WP ready to approve", "check this implementation". Does NOT handle: setup-only…
feature-dev
Guide a feature implementation through a structured seven-phase workflow with deep codebase understanding, clarifying questions, parallel architecture design, and quality review. Use this skill when the user asks to build a new feature, add functionality, or wants a methodical approach to implementation rather than…