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 KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude --skill meeting-notesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KhaledSaeed18/dotclaudeWrote 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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/meeting-notes)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/meeting-notes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/meeting-notes/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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/meeting-notes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/meeting-notes.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 | $0.00088 | $0.00783 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00313 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
meeting-notes 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
A meeting record is read by two people: the one who was there and forgot, and the one who was not there and needs to act. Both want the decisions and the actions, not the conversation. Summarise the conversation only as far as it explains a decision.
Read first
- The whole transcript or notes, once, before extracting anything.
- The previous meeting's record if it exists (same series), to carry over open actions and check which were done.
- The team's notes format, if any (a directory of past notes, a template). Match it exactly; a record in a new format is a record nobody finds.
Extract
Decisions: something the group agreed will happen or be true. Record the decision, who made or confirmed it, the reason given, and any alternative rejected. A decision without a reason gets [reason not stated], not a guessed one.
Action items: a verb, one owner (a person, never "the team"), a due date or [date not set]. If the transcript assigns nothing, list the action under "Unassigned" rather than picking someone.
Open questions: raised and not resolved, with who raised it and what resolving it would need.
Information shared: facts stated that others will need (a number, a date, a status), briefly.
Everything else (discussion, tangents, pleasantries) is left out unless it explains a decision.
Attribution rules
- Attribute only when the transcript makes the speaker clear. Otherwise
[speaker unclear]. - Quote exact words only for a decision or a commitment; paraphrase everything else.
- Do not infer agreement from silence; "no objection" is recorded as such.
- Do not soften or sharpen what was said.
Format (default, when the team has none)
# <Meeting name>, 2026-09-21
Attendees: A, B, C. Apologies: D. Notes: (author).
## Summary
Three sentences on what the meeting was for and what came out of it.
## Decisions
1. **Ship the v2 API behind a flag on 1 Oct.** (B) Reason: mobile needs two weeks after the contract freezes. Rejected: shipping unflagged on 25 Sep.
## Action items
| Action | Owner | Due | Status |
| Freeze the v2 contract and publish the OpenAPI diff | A | 2026-09-24 | new |
| (carried over) Fix the flaky checkout test | C | 2026-09-19 | overdue |
## Open questions
- Do we deprecate v1 this quarter? (raised by C; needs the usage numbers B will pull)
## Shared
- Error budget for September is 40% consumed (B).
## Next meeting
2026-09-28; agenda seeds: v1 deprecation decision.
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 · 68 lines · 88 tokens per session scan A 1de71b122494
meeting-notes is a skill published in the GitHub repository KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude (5 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 88 tokens to every session and 783 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 2026-09-22.
Other skills, from other repositories
stakeholder-communication
Communicate effectively with stakeholders across functions and seniority levels. Use this skill when writing status updates, preparing executive reviews, sharing technical decisions with non-technical audiences, managing up, communicating bad news, or designing the communication cadence for a project. Triggers on…
after-action-report
Run a structured after-action review (postmortem, retrospective) on a launch, incident, or completed project to capture timeline, root cause analysis, contributing factors, and actionable lessons. Use this skill whenever the user wants to run a postmortem, retrospective, AAR, or after-action review on any past event.…
mass-ulw
Drives dependency-ordered child work through the native workflow tool, each phase's stages defined up front in one run, with retry/amend/send recovery. Use when the user asks for mass-ulw, a DAG of tasks, or fan-out work where some tasks must wait on others.
beta-program-management
Running closed and open betas that produce real signal. Beta participant selection, structured feedback collection, beta-to-GA decision criteria, and the difference between soft-launch (no structure, no signal), kitchen-sink (everyone in, no actionable feedback), and structured beta (calibrated cohort, intentional…
okr-design
OKR design as actually shipped, not as conference-talk theory. Outcome statements that drive decisions, key results that measure the right thing, scoring discipline, mid-quarter recalibration, and the difference between sandbagged OKRs (always 100%) and aspirational OKRs (always 30%) and stretch OKRs (genuine ambition…
roadmap-planning
Build a multi-quarter roadmap from a backlog of ideas, requests, and ongoing initiatives. Use this skill when planning the next quarter, sequencing dependent work, balancing build vs improve vs maintain, or making the case for what NOT to do. Triggers on roadmap, quarterly planning, what should we build next…