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 JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-Python --skill cpp-coding-standardsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-PythonWrote 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/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/cpp-coding-standards)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/cpp-coding-standards"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/cpp-coding-standards/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/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/cpp-coding-standards"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/cpp-coding-standards.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 | $0.00048 | $0.06025 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.02410 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.01205 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00602 |
Grade A, and why
cpp-coding-standards 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
98% identical to cpp-coding-standards — 3 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 — 725 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
C++ Coding Standards (C++ Core Guidelines)
Comprehensive coding standards for modern C++ (C++17/20/23) derived from the C++ Core Guidelines. Enforces type safety, resource safety, immutability, and clarity.
When to Use
- Writing new C++ code (classes, functions, templates)
- Reviewing or refactoring existing C++ code
- Making architectural decisions in C++ projects
- Enforcing consistent style across a C++ codebase
- Choosing between language features (e.g.,
enumvsenum class, raw pointer vs smart pointer)
When NOT to Use
- Non-C++ projects
- Legacy C codebases that cannot adopt modern C++ features
- Embedded/bare-metal contexts where specific guidelines conflict with hardware constraints (adapt selectively)
Cross-Cutting Principles
These themes recur across the entire guidelines and form the foundation:
- RAII everywhere (P.8, R.1, E.6, CP.20): Bind resource lifetime to object lifetime
- Immutability by default (P.10, Con.1-5, ES.25): Start with
const/constexpr; mutability is the exception - Type safety (P.4, I.4, ES.46-49, Enum.3): Use the type system to prevent errors at compile time
- Express intent (P.3, F.1, NL.1-2, T.10): Names, types, and concepts should communicate purpose
- Minimize complexity (F.2-3, ES.5, Per.4-5): Simple code is correct code
- Value semantics over pointer semantics (C.10, R.3-5, F.20, CP.31): Prefer returning by value and scoped objects
Philosophy & Interfaces (P., I.)
Key Rules
| Rule | Summary |
|---|---|
| P.1 | Express ideas directly in code |
| P.3 | Express intent |
| P.4 | Ideally, a program should be statically type safe |
| P.5 | Prefer compile-time checking to run-time checking |
| P.8 | Don't leak any resources |
| P.10 | Prefer immutable data to mutable data |
| I.1 | Make interfaces explicit |
| I.2 | Avoid non-const global variables |
| I.4 | Make interfaces precisely and strongly typed |
| I.11 | Never transfer ownership by a raw pointer or reference |
| I.23 | Keep the number of function arguments low |
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 · 725 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A f870b47d3493
cpp-coding-standards is a skill published in the GitHub repository JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-Python (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 6,025 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 98% identical to cpp-coding-standards, differing in 3 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
frama-c-proofreader
Verify and proofread C code with ACSL using this repository's Frama-C MCP workflow, Frama-C WP static proof, EVA alarms, and optional E-ACSL runtime checks. Use when asked to run Frama-C, check ACSL contracts, explain WP goals, inspect EVA alarms, validate C annotations, or state what a C proof does and does not…
cpp-coding-standards
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
qt-cpp-review
Invoke when the user asks to review, check, audit, or look over Qt6 C++ code — or suggest before committing. Runs deterministic linting (60+ rules) then six parallel deep- analysis agents covering model contracts, ownership, threading, API correctness, error handling, and performance. Reports only high-confidence…
cpp-idioms
Modern C++ (17/20/23) idioms: RAII, smart pointers, value semantics, Rule of Zero/Five, concepts, and std::expected error handling. Use when writing, refactoring, or reviewing C++ code, CMake targets, or native modules.
ue-mcp-native-cpp
Use when writing or modifying native C++ UCLASSes in an Unreal project via ue-mcp. Covers createcppclass → writecppfile → livecodingcompile loop, when to use build vs Live Coding, and the addmoduledependency workflow. Pulls in any time the user asks to write a new native class, add a UPROPERTY, or implement a…
python-design-pattern
Python design patterns and anti-patterns. Use when designing new components, refactoring, reviewing code for common mistakes, choosing abstractions, or evaluating pull requests for structural issues like tight coupling, leaking internal types, or error handling problems.