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 lucastamoios/skills --skill fixgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lucastamoios/skillsWrote 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/lucastamoios/skills/fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lucastamoios/skills/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lucastamoios/skills/fix/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/lucastamoios/skills/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lucastamoios/skills/fix.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 | $0.00053 | $0.02150 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.01075 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00430 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00215 |
Grade A, and why
fix 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 8d 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 — 230 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Fix
This skill takes a bug report from any source, systematically diagnoses the root cause, writes a failing regression test, and fixes it.
Argument: $ARGUMENTS
Step 1: Parse the input
$ARGUMENTS can contain any combination of:
- Sentry issue URL - fetch full details via Sentry MCP (stacktrace, error message, breadcrumbs, tags, environment, release, frequency, affected user count)
- Linear issue identifier (e.g.,
<TEAM>-123) - fetch issue details via Linear MCP - Pasted stacktrace - extract file paths, line numbers, error message
- Plain text description - use as starting context
Identify which sources are present and fetch from all of them. Do not limit yourself to one source.
Sentry-specific: claim the issue
If the input includes a Sentry issue, assign it to the current user immediately so others know it is being worked on.
Step 2: Gather context
Now that you know what the bug is about, explore:
- Code referenced in the stacktrace - read the files, understand what they do
- Related tests - find existing tests for the affected code
- Recent commits - check git log for recent changes to the affected files
- Requirements and design docs - read any docs in
docs/requirements/anddocs/design/that relate to the affected area - Similar Sentry errors (only when a Sentry URL was provided) - search for related errors that might share the same root cause. Note them for later.
Be greedy. Pull everything available before starting diagnosis.
Step 3: Three-level cause analysis
Diagnose the bug by identifying three levels of cause. Do not skip to fixing.
a) Direct cause
The immediate technical failure. What line of code breaks? What value is wrong? What exception is thrown? This is what the stacktrace shows you.
b) Root cause
Keep asking "why" until you hit something systemic:
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 230 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 348a5c3745fb
fix is a skill published in the GitHub repository lucastamoios/skills (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 2,150 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
systematic-debugging
4-phase root cause debugging: understand bugs before fixing.
langsmith-observability
LLM observability platform for tracing, evaluation, and monitoring. Use when debugging LLM applications, evaluating model outputs against datasets, monitoring production systems, or building systematic testing pipelines for AI applications.
experimental-code-coverage-local-debugger
Runs code coverage locally via Universal Test Runner (UTR) or helper scripts, mimicking LUCI trybots. Activate when CQ tryjobs fail or underreport coverage, to test local GN/recipe repairs before uploading, or to debug hermetic crashes.
adversarial-reviewer
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
cli-e2e
Write, modify, or debug Docker-based Composio CLI end-to-end tests under ts/e2e-tests/cli, including binary invocation, fixture isolation, output assertions, and package manifests. Use for CLI E2E test suites only; use cli-command for CLI source implementation.
ios-simulator
Verify and debug native, React Native, Expo, or Flutter apps on an iOS Simulator with agent-device. Use when an agent needs to launch an app, inspect its live UI, tap, type, scroll, validate a code change, collect failure evidence, or reproduce a workflow on an iPhone or iPad Simulator.