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 agentmods add skills/jimmypaolini/codebase/codometer-triagenpx skills add JimmyPaolini/codebase --skill codometer-triagegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JimmyPaolini/codebaseWhat 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 | $0.00090 | $0.01045 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00045 | $0.00522 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00209 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
codometer-triage 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 yesterday.
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 — 88 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Acting on a codometer failure
A --check run reports three different kinds of finding, and they call for
three different responses. Reading which one occurred, rather than reacting to
"the check failed," is most of this skill.
A breach
A metric went past a limit declared for it. The report names the metric, the limit's value, and its severity:
warnprints the breach and leaves the exit code alone. Nothing about the run fails; it is advance notice that a number is moving in a direction worth watching.failexits1, and only when the run asked--check limitsfor a gate at all — a barecodometermeasuring the same breach reports nothing wrong, because nothing asked it to gate.
The instinctive fix — raising the limit's value — is not an option. The
limit exists to keep a promise about the codebase's shape; loosening it on the
same change that broke the promise erases the evidence the check existed to
produce, and the next breach starts from a codebase that is already worse.
Reduce what is actually being measured instead:
- A size breach: shrink the target's own output — trim a dependency, split a
bundle, delete dead code — rather than the number that reports it. The
codometer-configureskill covers declaring a target and pointing it at compiled output correctly, which is a common reason a size looks larger than the code that produced it: a target measuring more than it should. - A convention-count breach (too many of something, or too few): the count is
usually accurate — the fix is in the code the counter is watching, not in
the counter's
value.
If the limit's number was simply wrong for what this metric should hold going forward — not because of this change, but as a standing decision — that is a deliberate edit to make and explain on its own, never a side effect of getting one check to pass.
Staleness
--check reports compares a committed report against a fresh measurement and
fails when they disagree, whether or not any limit is involved. Two causes
produce this, and only one of them is a real regression:
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.
- yesterday First seen · 88 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A 960c81b9bae9
codometer-triage is a skill published in the GitHub repository JimmyPaolini/codebase (0 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 1,045 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-09-01.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…