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 jmagly/aiwg --skill link-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jmagly/aiwgWrote 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/jmagly/aiwg/link-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jmagly/aiwg/link-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jmagly/aiwg/link-check.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00029 | $0.01819 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00910 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00364 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00182 |
Grade A, and why
link-check scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 7d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Link Check
You verify every @file reference in AIWG distributable skills and agents against the full linking contract, producing a structured PASS/WARN/FAIL report per reference. You can run against a single file, a directory, or the full agentic/code/ corpus, and optionally auto-migrate legacy bare refs to the @$AIWG_ROOT/ prefix.
Triggers
- "link check" / "check links" → run against current file or directory
- "link check agentic/code/" → full corpus scan
- "link check --fix" → auto-migrate legacy bare refs
- "any bad links?" → run link-check on current context
- "check for broken @-refs" → run link-check
- "are there any legacy bare refs?" → run link-check, focus on 4b
Usage
/link-check [path] [options]
| Argument | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
| path | current file or agentic/code/ |
File or directory to check |
| --fix | off | Auto-migrate @agentic/code/, @src/, @docs/, @tools/ → @$AIWG_ROOT/ |
| --report | off | Output structured JSON report instead of human-readable |
| --aiwg-only | off | Check only .aiwg/ refs (skip bare-core and forbidden checks) |
| --fail-on-warn | off | Treat WARN as FAIL (useful for CI) |
Reference Classification
Each @<path> reference is classified per the AIWG linking contract:
| Pattern | Result | Reason |
|---|---|---|
@$AIWG_ROOT/<path> |
PASS | AIWG core file, install-relative |
@$TOKEN/<path> — TOKEN set in env |
PASS | Registered corpus token |
@$TOKEN/<path> — TOKEN NOT set |
WARN | Unknown token — add to .env or export |
@.aiwg/<path> — in Tier 1/2 allowlist |
PASS | Normalized project memory |
@.aiwg/<path> — not in allowlist |
FAIL | Repo-local only — silently fails in user projects |
@.claude/<path> |
FAIL | Deployment target — forbidden in distributable source |
@agentic/code/<path> |
WARN | Legacy bare ref — use @$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/ |
@src/<path> |
WARN | Legacy bare ref — use @$AIWG_ROOT/src/ |
@docs/<path> |
WARN | Legacy bare ref — use @$AIWG_ROOT/docs/ |
@tools/<path> |
WARN | Legacy bare ref — use @$AIWG_ROOT/tools/ |
| Relative path within component | PASS | Local ref |
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 176 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 626adbdbef46
link-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository jmagly/aiwg (209 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,819 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
coding-standards
Universal coding standards, best practices, and patterns for TypeScript, JavaScript, React, and Node.js development. Use when writing any code to ensure consistent quality.
huggingface-vision-trainer
Train object-detection, image-classification, or SAM segmentation models on Hugging Face Jobs. Use for vision fine-tuning and evaluation; use huggingface-llm-trainer for language models.
insecure-defaults
Detects fail-open insecure defaults (hardcoded secrets, weak auth, permissive security) that allow apps to run insecurely in production. Use when auditing security, reviewing config management, or analyzing environment variable handling.
ln-11-plan-reviewer
Reviews an implementation plan against repository evidence before execution; identifies missing decisions and risks. Not for completed-code review.
ln-71-system-design-baseline-builder
Creates architecture-driving requirements and constraints before design. Not for target design, plan review, or implementation audits.
ai-slop
Operational rubric that turns "don't make AI slop" into observable properties, severity levels, evidence requirements, and repair actions for interface design. Use as the reference rubric when building or reviewing marketing sites, product interfaces, dashboards, portfolios, or e-commerce pages, especially alongside…