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 MadAppGang/claude-code --skill implementgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MadAppGang/claude-codeWrote 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/madappgang/claude-code/implement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/madappgang/claude-code/implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/madappgang/claude-code/implement/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/madappgang/claude-code/implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/madappgang/claude-code/implement.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 | $0.00015 | $0.03522 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.01409 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00704 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00352 |
Grade A, and why
implement 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 1mo 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 — 465 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
plugin: conductor updated: 2026-01-20
<status_progression>
Task status MUST follow this progression:
- [ ] (pending) - Not started
- [~] (in_progress) - Currently working
- [x] (complete) - Finished
- [!] (blocked) - Blocked by issue
Only ONE task can be [~] at a time.
</status_progression>
<tdd_workflow>
Follow Test-Driven Development for each task:
**Red Phase:**
1. Create test file for the feature
2. Write tests defining expected behavior
3. Run tests - confirm they FAIL
4. Do NOT proceed until tests fail
**Green Phase:**
1. Write MINIMUM code to pass tests
2. Run tests - confirm they PASS
3. No refactoring yet
**Refactor Phase:**
1. Improve code clarity and performance
2. Remove duplication
3. Run tests - confirm they still PASS
</tdd_workflow>
<git_commit_protocol>
After completing each task:
1. Stage relevant changes
2. Commit with proper format:
```
<type>(<scope>): <description>
- Detail 1
- Detail 2
Task: {phase}.{task}
```
3. Attach git note with task summary:
```bash
git notes add -m "Task: {phase}.{task} - {title}
Summary: {what was accomplished}
Files Changed:
- {file1}: {description}
Why: {business reason}" $(git log -1 --format="%H")
```
4. Update metadata.json with commit SHA
</git_commit_protocol>
<commit_types>
| Type | Use For |
|------|---------|
| feat | New feature |
| fix | Bug fix |
| docs | Documentation |
| style | Formatting |
| refactor | Code restructuring |
| test | Adding tests |
| chore | Maintenance |
| perf | Performance |
</commit_types>
<workflow_adherence>
ALWAYS follow procedures in conductor/workflow.md:
- TDD Red/Green/Refactor cycle
- Quality gates (>80% coverage, linting)
- Document deviations in tech-stack.md
- Phase Completion Protocol at phase end
</workflow_adherence>
<human_approval_gates>
Pause and ask for user approval:
- Before starting each new phase
- When encountering blockers
- Before marking phase complete
- During Phase Completion Protocol Step 5
</human_approval_gates>
</critical_constraints>
<core_principles> Focus on exactly one task. Complete it fully before moving to next. No partial implementations.
<principle name="Test First" priority="critical">
Write failing tests BEFORE implementation.
This is the Red phase of TDD.
Never skip this step.
</principle>
<principle name="Continuous Status Updates" priority="critical">
Update plan.md status immediately when:
- Starting a task ([~])
- Completing a task ([x])
- Encountering a blocker ([!] with note)
</principle>
<principle name="Traceable Commits" priority="high">
Every commit links to track/task.
Commit messages follow type convention.
Git notes provide audit trail.
</principle>
</core_principles>
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 465 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 47f3852eb6ad
implement is a skill published in the GitHub repository MadAppGang/claude-code (287 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 3,522 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
workflow-patterns
Systematic task implementation using TDD, phase checkpoints, and structured commits. Ensures quality through red-green-refactor cycles, 80% coverage gates, and verification protocols before proceeding.
workflow-patterns
Use this skill when implementing tasks according to Conductor's TDD workflow, handling phase checkpoints, managing git commits for tasks, or understanding the verification protocol.
implement
Use when an approved plan and task list exist and it is time to turn them into working, tested code — the SDD phase after analyze and before verify. Enforces TDD: a failing test comes before the code that makes it pass, one task at a time, appended to a progress ledger that survives compaction. Delegates test tooling…
cmux-testing
Choose scoped cmux verification, add behavioral tests, and validate Swift test targets and wiring. Use when adding tests or deciding what local/CI evidence a change needs.
nw-quality-framework
Quality gates - 11 commit readiness gates, build/test protocol, validation checkpoints, and quality metrics.
gh-issue
Fetch GitHub issue, create branch, plan and implement with TDD, then open PR.