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 kimsanguine/hplan --skill customer-reachgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kimsanguine/hplanWrote 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/kimsanguine/hplan/customer-reach)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kimsanguine/hplan/customer-reach"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kimsanguine/hplan/customer-reach/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/kimsanguine/hplan/customer-reach"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kimsanguine/hplan/customer-reach.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 | $0.00106 | $0.01363 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.00681 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00273 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00136 |
Grade A, and why
customer-reach 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 10d 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 — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Core Goal
"고객 발화 3건"을 pain.md에 채우기 위한 인터뷰 대상자 확보 도구. 발견(plan/search) → 초안 생성(linkedin/community/survey) → 기록(pain.md) 순서로 사용.
Trigger Gate
Use This Skill When
- "인터뷰할 사람 어떻게 찾아요?" → plan
- "LinkedIn에서 DM 보내고 싶어요" → linkedin
- "커뮤니티에 포스팅하려고요" → community
- "설문지 만들어줘요" → survey
- evidence-gate WARN → "실제 인터뷰 증거를 얻기 전에 이 스킬부터 시작하세요"
- "인터뷰 약속을 잡았는데 뭘 물어봐야 할지 모르겠어" →
--mode interview-questions
Route to Other Skills When
- 인터뷰 결과를 기록할 때 → harness/pain.md 직접 작성 (커맨드 없음)
- 기록 후 검증 → evidence-rubric / evidence-gate
- 소크라테스 가정 심문 (인터뷰 전) → socratic-question
- 인터뷰 결과를 pain.md에 기록한 후 → evidence-rubric (증거 품질 점검)
Instructions
mode: plan
- $ARGUMENTS의 ICP 설명을 읽어 타겟 확보 전략을 설계한다 (LLM)
- 3가지 채널 추천: LinkedIn / 커뮤니티(오픈채팅, Reddit, Discord) / 지인 네트워크
- 각 채널별 예상 성공률과 소요 시간 추정 (결정론: 고정 기준표 기반)
- harness/reach-plan.md에 저장
mode: linkedin
ICP에 맞는 LinkedIn cold DM 초안 생성:
안녕하세요 [이름]님,
저는 [내 소개 1줄]입니다.
[ICP의 특정 역할/상황]에서 [핵심 고충]을 어떻게 해결하시는지 15분 여쭤봐도 될까요?
보상 없이도 가능하지만, 원하신다면 [가치 교환 1줄]도 가능합니다.
ICP 분야에 따라 문구를 조정한다. 스팸 느낌 패턴 (긴급/할인/과장) 제거.
mode: community
커뮤니티 포스팅 초안:
- 제목: "[ICP 역할] 분들께 15분 인터뷰 요청드립니다"
- 내용: 무엇을 만드는지 1줄, 누구에게 물어보고 싶은지, 왜 당신의 의견이 중요한지
- 플랫폼별 톤 조정: Reddit(영문/격식X) vs 카카오오픈채팅(한국어/친근함)
mode: survey
인터뷰 대체용 5문 이하 설문 초안:
- Q1: 현재 [문제 영역]을 어떻게 해결하시나요? (객관식 4개)
- Q2: 가장 번거로운 점은? (서술 or 객관식)
- Q3: 기존 해결책에 얼마나 만족하시나요? (1-5)
- Q4: 새로운 도구가 생긴다면 가장 원하는 기능 1가지는?
- Q5: 인터뷰 참여 의향 (예/아니오 + 연락처 선택)
mode: interview-questions
인터뷰 약속을 잡은 후, 어떤 질문을 할지 설계합니다. socratic-question이 내 가정을 심문한다면, interview-questions는 고객에게 던질 질문을 설계합니다.
입력: $ARGUMENTS의 ICP 설명 + 검증하고 싶은 핵심 가정 (없으면 docs/brainstorm-assumptions.md에서 로드)
-
JTBD(Jobs to Be Done) 프레임으로 핵심 질문 3~5개 생성 (LLM):
- "마지막으로 이 문제를 겪은 게 언제인가요?" (사실 확인형)
- "그때 어떻게 해결하셨나요?" (현재 우회책 확인)
- "이 과정에서 가장 번거로운 부분은 뭔가요?" (pain 깊이 측정)
-
각 질문에 대해 인터뷰 지침 추가:
- 좋은 답변 신호 (pain 실재 확인)
- 나쁜 답변 신호 (pain 없거나 의례적 답변)
- 후속 질문 힌트
-
harness/interview-guide.md에 저장:# 인터뷰 가이드 — [ICP 설명] ## 핵심 가정 - [검증할 가정 목록] ## 질문 세트 ### Q1. [질문] - 좋은 답변 신호: ... - 나쁜 답변 신호: ... - 후속: ...
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 110 lines · 106 tokens per session scan A 31295c673f2a
customer-reach is a skill published in the GitHub repository kimsanguine/hplan (2 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 106 tokens to every session and 1,363 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
codex-setup
Initialize sd0x-dev-flow infrastructure for Codex CLI and other non-Claude agents. Generates AGENTS.md, installs the commit-msg hook, copies runner scripts. The pre-push gate is opt-in via --with-push-gate. Use when setting up a new project or after updating skills.
smart-rebase
Smart partial rebase for squash-merge repositories. Auto-detect which commits to keep/drop when base branch was squash-merged into target. Use when: user says 'rebase', 'partial rebase', 'base already merged', 'smart rebase', or /smart-rebase. Not for: simple git rebase (the developer runs it — Claude never executes…
runbook
Generate and update feature release runbooks from existing docs and codebase. Use when: creating operational runbook, release handbook, deployment checklist, pre-release preparation. Not for: incident response (v2), code review (use codex-code-review), architecture design (use architecture).
test-review
Test coverage review via Codex exec. Use when: reviewing test sufficiency, identifying coverage gaps, test quality audit. Not for: generating tests (use codex-test-gen), code review (use codex-code-review). Output: coverage analysis + gap report.
debug
Interactive debugging workflow with hypothesis-driven probe loop. Use when: unknown bugs, script errors, silent failures, troubleshooting. Not for: known bugs (use bug-fix), GitHub issue analysis (use issue-analyze), code understanding (use code-explore). Output: debug report with probe journal + root cause + fix.
feature-dev
Feature development workflow. Use when: implementing features, writing code, running dev loop. Not for: understanding code (use code-explore), reviewing code (use codex-code-review). Output: implemented feature + tests + review gate.