Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to kyleve/Stuff. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kyleve/Stuff/main/.agents/skills/github-workflow/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kyleve/StuffWrote 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/kyleve/stuff/github-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kyleve/stuff/github-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kyleve/stuff/github-workflow/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/kyleve/stuff/github-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kyleve/stuff/github-workflow.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 | $0.00040 | $0.06151 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.02460 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.01230 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00615 |
Grade A, and why
github-workflow 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 2d 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 — 488 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
GitHub workflow for this repo. Read root AGENTS.md first for
always-on commit and test invariants. This skill assumes those.
Prerequisites
- Never commit on
main. Branch first and keep every commit for one piece of work on that one branch. - Run checks in proportion to risk. Pure documentation or comment-only changes can skip checks that cannot exercise them. Record skipped checks in the PR. Never push a known-red tree.
Tools
| Job | Tool |
|---|---|
| Read PRs, checks, comments, issues | gh |
| Download CircleCI failure artifacts | ./circleci-artifacts <job-uuid-or-url> |
| Create or update a PR | ManagePullRequest when available; otherwise gh pr create / gh pr edit |
| Create, update, sync, or merge a PR stack | gh stack |
| Reply on a review thread | ManagePullRequest post_comment with in_reply_to, or gh api |
| Resolve a review thread | ManagePullRequest resolve_comment when asked |
Cloud agents: use ManagePullRequest for create/update/reply — not gh pr create / gh pr edit. Local sessions can use gh throughout.
Stacked PRs are the exception: use gh stack in every environment for
stack topology and lifecycle. ManagePullRequest and gh pr edit can refine
an individual PR's title or body after submission. They must not manually wire
base branches or substitute for gh stack.
Unsolicited top-level PR comments (not review replies) still need an
explicit user request. Review feedback is different: when the user asks you
to address comments (PTAL, address review, fix the feedback), that
authorizes replies on the threads you fix, decline, or defer — see
Review comments.
Branch, push, and plan handoff
- Multi-step work lands one commit per step, so history stays bisectable and can land piecewise — including pure-groundwork steps, which say so in the body.
- Commit completed work eagerly. Once a coherent change is verified, commit it unless the user explicitly asks to keep it uncommitted.
- Push the branch as commits land. Do not accumulate unpushed work or wait for the user to ask.
- Plan-driven work finishes with a PR. After executing an approved plan (all steps verified), push the branch and open a ready-for-review PR before handing back — or update the existing PR if one is already open. Never leave finished plan work local-only, unpushed, or without a PR the user can review.
- Any finished task on a feature branch follows the same push habit. Open or update the PR when the branch carries reviewable work, not only after formal plans.
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.
- 2d ago Changed · -12 lines 0e6377961f70
- 11d ago Changed · +78 lines aaf317ec785b
- 18d ago Changed · +58 lines 9992472c0d08
- 22d ago Changed · +35 lines · -34 tokens per session cedea3555f03
- 2mo ago First seen · 329 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A 65ae6f32707d
github-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository kyleve/Stuff (4 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 6,151 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…