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 session-retrospectivegit 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/session-retrospective)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/session-retrospective"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/session-retrospective/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/session-retrospective"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/session-retrospective.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 | $0.00106 | $0.07914 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00042 | $0.03166 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.01583 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00791 |
Grade A, and why
session-retrospective 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 4d 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 — 397 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Session Retrospective
Structured post-implementation analysis. Evaluates the run across five dimensions, persists findings in MCP, and keeps cross-session trend memory to surface improvement proposals.
Calls are 4.0 tool calls; shapes live in ../_generated/call-shapes.md. Every answer is the response envelope (ok, data or error). A write is {ops: [...]} of flat elements (one per to-call block here). Results come back as data.results[i] in request order with data.summary {ok, failed}; read ops of an ops tool (config get, validate, effective) answer there too. These calls are non-atomic: if any element fails, even in a one-element call, the answer is ok: false with top-level error.code: partial_failure (no detail, no fix) beside the full data, and the cause is that element's data.results[i].error (code, message, detail, fix). Any other top-level error.code is a call-level rejection (envelope, unknown field, access).
How the trigger works
A retrospective is owed per closed run that is not marked retro. Two hooks watch for it:
retro-trigger(PostToolUse onruns_write) acts only on a successfulop: close.retro-backstop(Stop) re-checks at the end of every turn, so a run closed elsewhere (another session, a subagent) is still found. A closed run is a confirmed boundary, so the backstop may dispatch as well as nudge.
Both ask REST runs_read list with unmarked: retro and endedSince = now - 24h, and read each run's terminal count from runs_read frontier (data.counts.terminal), for at most 5 runs per pass. In mode dispatch with a terminal count at or above dispatchThreshold (default 3) they call runs_write mark {runId, key: retro} (REST only; first write wins, which is the cross-session dedupe; marked: false means another session won, so they stay silent) and emit the dispatch directive. Below the threshold, in nudge mode (the default), or when the mark fails, they nudge once per run per session and never mark. There is no cross-session marker file (the server mark is the dedupe); per-session state (recorded closes, runs already nudged) lives in os.tmpdir()/task-orchestrator/<session>/retro.json. A run whose frontier read fails is skipped that pass, and a close made by a subagent is recorded for the main session's backstop, not acted on. Without an API URL or a project rootId the backstop only nudges once per session, from the closes the trigger recorded.
What ships with it
2 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.
- 4d ago Changed · -240 lines · +2 tokens per session 86036c4ce002
- 20d ago Changed · +3 lines 8f5916fe6a1c
- 21d ago Changed · +6 lines 034a22d272f3
- 23d ago Changed · -3 tokens per session 5fd0fdf520b3
- 25d ago Changed 980fb58107c1
- 28d ago Changed · +42 lines 6fabca61931e
- 1mo ago First seen · 586 lines · 107 tokens per session scan A a802d9c235ad
session-retrospective is a skill published in the GitHub repository jpicklyk/task-orchestrator (210 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 106 tokens to every session and 7,914 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
pinescript
Pine Script v6: syntax, performance, error diagnosis, backtesting, visualization. Use when writing or debugging .pine files or TradingView Pine indicators/strategies.
debugging
Systematic root-cause debugging with verification. Use for errors, stack traces, broken tests, flaky tests, regressions, or anything not working as expected. For validating bug reports before fixing, use bug-reproduction-validator agent.
document-review
Structural and accuracy review of documents: gaps, clarity, completeness, organization, and claims checked against the code. Use when a brainstorm, plan, spec, ADR, or any doc needs polish before the next workflow step. For exploring new ideas from scratch, use brainstorming instead.
reflect
Session retrospective and skill audit. Use when asked to reflect, do a retrospective, review lessons learned, audit what went well or wrong, or review session effectiveness.
cpp-systems
Modern C++ patterns: RAII and ownership, rule of zero/five, exceptions and error handling, API and ABI boundaries, templates, and CMake tooling. Use when writing, reviewing, refactoring, or debugging C++, working with smart pointers, move semantics, memory leaks, template errors, or gtest. For plain C, see…
receiving-code-review
Process code review feedback critically: check correctness before acting, push back on incorrect suggestions, no performative agreement. Use when responding to PR/MR review comments or implementing reviewer suggestions received from others.