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 agentmods add skills/lfyxhappy/lfcode/mergenpx skills add lfyxhappy/lfcode --skill mergegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lfyxhappy/lfcodeWhat 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 | $0.00041 | $0.02047 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.01024 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00409 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00205 |
Grade A, and why
compose:merge scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured yesterday.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to compose:merge — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 253 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Finishing a Development Branch
Overview
Guide completion of development work by presenting clear options and handling chosen workflow.
Core principle: Verify tests → Detect environment → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.
Announce at start: "I'm using the compose:merge skill to complete this work."
The Process
Step 1: Verify Tests
Before presenting options, verify tests pass:
# Run project's test suite
npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...
If tests fail:
Tests failing (<N> failures). Must fix before completing:
[Show failures]
Cannot proceed with merge/PR until tests pass.
Stop. Don't proceed to Step 2.
If tests pass: Continue to Step 2.
Step 2: Detect Environment
Determine workspace state before presenting options:
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
This determines which menu to show and how cleanup works:
| State | Menu | Cleanup |
|---|---|---|
GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON (normal repo) |
Standard 4 options | No worktree to clean up |
GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON, named branch |
Standard 4 options | Provenance-based (see Step 6) |
GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON, detached HEAD |
Reduced 3 options (no merge) | No cleanup (externally managed) |
Step 3: Determine Base Branch
# Try common base branches
git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master 2>/dev/null
If the base branch is ambiguous, confirm through compose:ask:
- header:
Base Branch - question:
This branch appears to have split from <detected>. Correct? - options:
- label:
Yes, <detected>, description:Use <detected> as merge target - label:
Different branch, description:I'll specify the correct base branch
- label:
If no user is available, use the detected base branch and proceed.
Step 4: Present Options
Normal repo / named-branch worktree — use compose:ask:
- header:
Complete Work - question:
Implementation complete. What would you like to do? - options:
- label:
Merge locally, description:Merge back to <base-branch> - label:
Create PR, description:Push branch and open a Pull Request - label:
Keep as-is, description:Leave the branch — I'll handle it later - label:
Discard, description:Delete branch and all commits
- label:
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.
- yesterday First seen · 253 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 2454974bfe26
compose:merge is a skill published in the GitHub repository lfyxhappy/lfcode (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 2,047 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to compose:merge, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
Review a GitHub PR (via gh)
Review a specific GitHub pull request with gh — fetch the diff, fan out reviewers, consolidate, and optionally post the review. Requires the gh CLI or the GitHub MCP server.
Implement (multi-agent loop)
Orchestrate an implement -> review -> fix loop with subagents until reviewers sign off.
Best of N (parallel attempts)
Delegate N parallel subagents on the same task, then pick the best result.
Check work (verify against criteria)
Verify an implementation against acceptance criteria with a reviewer and a tester.
Commit (clean, conventional)
Stage the right changes and write a clear, conventional commit message.
Design doc (write -> review loop)
Draft a design document and iterate writer/reviewer subagents until consensus.