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 jpicklyk/task-orchestrator --skill adopt-project-scopegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jpicklyk/task-orchestratorWrote 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/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/adopt-project-scope)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/adopt-project-scope"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/adopt-project-scope/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/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/adopt-project-scope"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/adopt-project-scope.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 134 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00099 | $0.03726 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00040 | $0.01490 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00745 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00373 |
Grade A, and why
adopt-project-scope 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 19d 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 — 291 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Adopt Project Scope — In-Place Migration to Project Scoping
Take an existing, unscoped database (many depth-0 roots, no project anchor) and migrate it in place to the project-scoping convention: one type=project root that owns the workspace's work trees, with its UUID written back to .taskorchestrator/config.yaml under a project: block. Global containers (retrospectives, observations) stay at depth 0; test artifacts are flagged for cleanup, never moved or deleted.
This is a destructive-by-execution skill: the EXECUTE step re-parents real items. It defaults to a dry run and never mutates anything without an explicit confirmation. The only thing it ever deletes is its own throwaway server-probe tree.
For a fresh workspace with no existing unscoped work, use /task-orchestrator:init instead; this skill is for databases that already hold unscoped work trees.
Non-goals: cross-DB consolidation (merging items from a second database); merging multiple existing project anchors into one; any server-side enforcement of scope. This skill adopts a single workspace's single database.
Step 0 — Parse Arguments
- Project name — the first non-flag token(s) in
$ARGUMENTS. If absent, do not guess; ask for it in Step 3 (the dry-run plan) viaAskUserQuestionbefore any mutation. --dry-run— if present, the skill stops after Step 3 (the plan) and performs zero mutations regardless of confirmation. The dry run is ALSO always rendered before execution even without the flag; the flag only forces an early exit.
Step 1 — Preflight (abort gates)
Run these checks in order. Each abort prints a clear, user-facing reason and stops.
1a — Already adopted?
Read .taskorchestrator/config.yaml. If it contains a project: block with a non-empty rootId:, the workspace is already scoped:
◆ Workspace already adopted — config.yaml already points at project root <rootId>.
Nothing to do. Use /work-summary to inspect the existing project tree.
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.
- 19d ago Changed · +4 lines 42d2829f9117
- 1mo ago First seen · 287 lines · 99 tokens per session scan A 0debeaab30c5
adopt-project-scope is a skill published in the GitHub repository jpicklyk/task-orchestrator (209 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 99 tokens to every session and 3,726 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
branch-surgery-pr-split
Split oversized or mixed-concern branches into smaller, reviewable PR stacks with safety refs, topology selection, parity audits, and merge sequencing. Use when a PR or branch is too large, difficult to review, mixed across concerns, conflict-prone, or needs to be decomposed without losing net changes.
do-it
Turn the current discussion into a task step and implement it — adds step to task file, updates spec if needed, then implements with review-fix loop.
plan-tasks
Read an existing spec and propose a task breakdown — assesses separable work streams, proposes split, creates task files linked to the spec.
draft-issue
Draft a GitHub issue based on a discussion or requirements in the current conversation.
run-task
Run pending steps, then aftertask finalization; does not close the task.
load-spec
Load a feature spec, its linked tasks, and feature-level progress and gaps.