reply

A skill for writing and sending a reply inside an existing Linux kernel mailing-list discussion. Linux kernel mailing lists are public, permanently archived email threads used to review code changes.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to answer reviewer comments, ask clarification questions, or report test results in an existing kernel patch thread.
Why use it?
It helps ensure review comments are answered in the correct thread and that the reply uses the original message details. It also separates review replies from posting corrected code as a new patch version.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/lexfrei/ccc/reply
Any agent
npx skills add lexfrei/ccc --skill reply
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lexfrei/ccc

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 90 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 981 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00090 $0.00981
Opus 5 $0.00045 $0.00491
Sonnet 5 $0.00018 $0.00196
Haiku 4.5 $0.00009 $0.00098

Measured 2d ago against content hash 241749044bc5, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

reply 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.

skills/lkml/skills/reply/SKILL.md · 66 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 66 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

A review reply is prose sent into a public, permanently archived thread. The mechanics are three commands; the failure modes are all in the content, so the content gates come first.

Gate: is a reply the right vehicle?

  • Review comments are answered in-thread. Fixed code is not — a new version of the series goes out as a new thread (lkml:submit). Never attach or inline corrected patches in a reply.
  • Answer the review before reposting: do not send a new version while the discussion about the current one is still ongoing, unless a reviewer directly asks for it.
  • Every reviewer comment gets a response — agreed-and-will-fix, a reasoned pushback, or a clarifying question. Silently dropping a point reads as ignoring the reviewer, and ignoring reviewers is how submissions start being ignored.

Build the reply

Fetch the thread mbox (lkml:lore) and take from the mail being answered: its exact Message-ID:, its exact Subject:, its From:, and the full recipient set. Never guess or reconstruct a Message-ID.

Write the reply to a file with a header block:

Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: dsa: mt7530: example subject copied exactly

> quoted fragment of the reviewer's point, trimmed to what is answered
> only

Response to that point.

> next quoted point

Response.

Formatting rules for the body:

  • Interleaved replies only. Quote a fragment with > , answer under it, repeat. Top-posting (answer above full quote) marks the mail as not worth reading.
  • Trim quotes. Keep only the lines being answered; delete the rest of the quoted mail, including the signature and the diff, unless a specific hunk is discussed.
  • Hard-wrap body text at about 72 columns. Kernel mail is plain-text with real line breaks — the opposite of markdown-renderer habits. No HTML, no attachments, no links where text will do.
  • Answer in the order the points were raised; one mail per parent mail being answered, not one mail per point.

Tone that works on kernel lists

Read the full file on GitHub · 66 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 66 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A 241749044bc5

Subscribe to this mod's changes

reply is a skill published in the GitHub repository lexfrei/ccc (9 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed BSD-3-Clause. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 981 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

next-cache-components-adoption

Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…

vercel/next.js · 95 tokens

babysit-pr

Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep…

openai/codex · 114 tokens

imagegen

Generate or edit raster images when the task benefits from AI-created bitmap visuals such as photos, illustrations, textures, sprites, mockups, or transparent-background cutouts. Use when Codex should create a brand-new image, transform an existing image, or derive visual variants from references, and the output…

openai/codex · 113 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens

next-cache-components-optimizer

Drive a Next.js route to instant navigation by setting up an agentic loop, under Cache Components / PPR, on initial load (hard navigation) and client-side navigation (soft navigation). Encode the goal as a failing @next/playwright instant() e2e and work it to green, one verified route at a time; the shipped test then…

vercel/next.js · 170 tokens