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 supervisor-updategit 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/supervisor-update)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/supervisor-update"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/supervisor-update/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/supervisor-update"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/supervisor-update.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 | $0.00075 | $0.00688 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00275 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00138 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00069 |
Grade A, and why
supervisor-update 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 25d 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 — 52 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Supervisors read updates between other things. The update's job is to let them help in the ten minutes they have: what moved, what is stuck, what decision they need to make. Everything else is noise.
Sources
RESEARCH_LOG.mdentries since the last meeting (or the period asked for). The log is the evidence; if it is thin, say so and ask the student what happened.- Git history for the period (
git log --since), new files underresearch/notes/, changed chapters. - The last update or meeting notes, to answer what was promised.
Structure
Subject: Thesis update, 21 Sep 2026
Since 7 Sep:
- Read 6 papers on X (notes in research/notes/); the gap holds: none evaluates Y in setting Z.
- Built the data pipeline (commit a1b2c3d); 412 sessions collected, 9 discarded for missing labels.
- First results: variant B reduces latency 23% (n=10, SD 4%) at all sizes, table attached.
Decided:
- Dropped baseline C: its code does not run on our data format and reimplementing costs two weeks. Comparing against A and D only.
Need from you:
- Is a 23% reduction with n=10 enough for RQ2, or should I run n=30 (adds three days)?
- Ethics amendment for the follow-up survey: can you sign the form (attached) by Thursday?
Next two weeks:
- Run the n=30 sweep if agreed (by 28 Sep).
- Draft results chapter section 4.2 (by 3 Oct).
- Literature synthesis outline for chapter 2 (by 5 Oct).
Open questions carried over: 1 (dataset licence; waiting on the provider since 30 Aug).
Rules
- Under 250 words for an email; under one page for an agenda.
- Every progress bullet has evidence: a path, a commit, a number, a note. No "worked on the literature review".
- Decisions include the reason and what they rule out, so the supervisor can object now, not at the defence.
- "Need from you" is the most important section and comes before "Next"; each item is a question or a concrete action with a date.
- Carry over open items until they are resolved, with their age; a supervisor sees a stuck item precisely because it keeps appearing.
- Match the department's register: formal salutation or not, first name or title, as in previous correspondence.
- Attach or link, never paste, tables and figures.
- Run
humanizebefore sending.
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.
- 25d ago First seen · 52 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A de518a8b648c
supervisor-update is a skill published in the GitHub repository KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 688 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
analytics-strategy
Design measurement frameworks including event taxonomy, KPI hierarchy, dashboard architecture, attribution models, and analytics implementation strategy. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan analytics, design dashboards, build event taxonomies, define KPIs, set up tracking, or audit existing measurement.…
content-strategy
Develop a content strategy covering editorial positioning, content pillars, formats, calendar, governance, and topical authority planning. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan a content program, define content pillars, build an editorial calendar, structure topic clusters, set up content governance, or align…
agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305
Für AGB Begriff Vorformuliert 305: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305.
agb-rechtswahl-schweizer-recht-rom-i
Für AGB Rechtswahl Schweizer Recht Rom I: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-rechtswahl-schweizer-recht-rom-i.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
haftungsdeckel-fuer-daten-und-modelldienste-pruefen
Bewertet Haftungshöchstbeträge bei Datenverlust, fehlerhaften Modellausgaben und Ausfällen digitaler Dienste anhand konkreter Schadensszenarien. Liefert eine Entscheidungsvorlage mit Risikobeträgen, Ausnahmen und Freigabebedarf.