Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to lxyer/multi-agent-collaboration-system. 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/lxyer/multi-agent-collaboration-system/main/.agents/skills/check/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lxyer/multi-agent-collaboration-systemWrote 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/lxyer/multi-agent-collaboration-system/check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lxyer/multi-agent-collaboration-system/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lxyer/multi-agent-collaboration-system/check.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00065 | $0.00279 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00139 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00056 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00028 |
Grade A, and why
check 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 6d 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.
What it actually says
Check if the code you just wrote follows the development guidelines.
Execute these steps:
-
Identify changed files:
git diff --name-only HEAD -
Determine which spec modules apply based on the changed file paths:
python3 ./.trellis/scripts/get_context.py --mode packages -
Read the spec index for each relevant module:
cat .trellis/spec/<package>/<layer>/index.mdFollow the "Quality Check" section in the index.
-
Read the specific guideline files referenced in the Quality Check section (e.g.,
quality-guidelines.md,conventions.md). The index is NOT the goal — it points you to the actual guideline files. Read those files and review your code against them. -
Run lint and typecheck for the affected package.
-
Report any violations and fix them if found.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 31 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A f286aa393f99
check is a skill published in the GitHub repository lxyer/multi-agent-collaboration-system (1 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 279 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
m15-anti-pattern
Use when reviewing code for anti-patterns. Keywords: anti-pattern, common mistake, pitfall, code smell, bad practice, code review, is this an anti-pattern, better way to do this, common mistake to avoid, why is this bad, idiomatic way, beginner mistake, fighting borrow checker, clone everywhere, unwrap in production…
coding-guidelines
Guidance for Rust code style and best practices, including naming, formatting, comments, linting, and code review.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
kn-review
Use when reviewing implemented code before committing — multi-perspective review with severity-based findings.
cmd-review
Review the current diff or selected files (usage: /review [--last-diff|--target |--file |files...] [--style ]).
kn-doc
Use when working with Knowns documentation - viewing, searching, creating, or updating docs.