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 marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skill --skill sap-api-policy-evidencegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skillWrote 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/marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skill/sap-api-policy-evidence)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skill/sap-api-policy-evidence"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skill/sap-api-policy-evidence/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/marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skill/sap-api-policy-evidence"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skill/sap-api-policy-evidence.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 | $0.00228 | $0.02229 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00114 | $0.01115 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00046 | $0.00446 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00223 |
Grade A, and why
sap-api-policy-evidence 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 10d 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 — 159 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
SAP API Policy — Evidence Assessment
Assess whether an SAP API usage scenario appears aligned with the SAP API Policy v.4.2026a (and its FAQ v1.2, May 2026) by gathering evidence from official SAP sources and the user's own facts, then producing a conservative, sourced technical assessment.
The one rule that defines this skill
Never present the result as legal advice, contractual advice, or a final/definitive SAP compliance decision. Only SAP, the applicable contract, or SAP support/account/legal channels can give a binding answer for a specific customer landscape. This is not a hedge you can drop to sound more helpful — SAP itself declines to publish a binary "compliant / not compliant" decision matrix (FAQ Q49), so a confident yes/no would misrepresent what is knowable. Your job is to get as close as possible with evidence and documentation, label your confidence honestly, and hand off the residual uncertainty as concrete questions for SAP.
Put the disclaimer at the top and bottom of every report (see references/report-template.md).
Out of scope — route to SAP, don't opine
Some requests are not evidence-based technical-alignment questions, and you must not answer them as if they were. When a question turns on any of the following, say plainly that it is outside this assessment and route it to the right SAP channel — do not guess:
- Legal / contractual: whether the policy is binding, how it enters existing/perpetual contracts, retroactivity, whether an API Hub listing is contractually authoritative, antitrust/competition-law questions → SAP Legal / contract owner / account team.
- Commercial / licensing: prices, SKUs, edition gating (e.g. Integration Suite tiers), Digital Access impact, service-supplement termination risk, connector licensing → SAP account team.
- Roadmap / GA timing: when A2A / Agent Gateway / MCP Gateway / Joule-on-prem ship → SAP Road Map Explorer as planning only, never current permission.
- SAP-internal process: who at SAP "approves" an API, enforcement/throttling decisions.
What ships with it
6 files 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.
- 10d ago First seen · 159 lines · 228 tokens per session scan A ba59f047ff03
sap-api-policy-evidence is a skill published in the GitHub repository marianfoo/sap-api-policy-skill (9 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 228 tokens to every session and 2,229 once invoked, about $0.0011 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
legalgraph
Turn legal documents, policies, contracts, compliance rules, and regulatory text into a queryable knowledge graph. Extracts clauses, obligations, prohibitions, permissions, cross-references, and detects conflicts. Answers questions like 'What does policy X say about Y?', 'Find all obligations for role Z', 'Are these…
mima-close-gaps
Run the compliance copilot loop — observe posture, identify gaps, dry-run proposed evidence records where possible, present for human approval, then write approved records. Use when the user asks to close compliance gaps, improve their EU AI Act score, or fix failing governance gates.
mima-register-systems
Run the Art. 9 intake workflow — find every AI system without an airiskassessment record, gather the required fields, and register each one. Use when the user asks to register systems, fix Art. 9 gaps, or prepare for the EU AI Act deadline.
mima-quarterly-evidence
Run the quarterly evidence collection workflow — find the stalest controls by record type, collect completion details for each, dry-run to confirm controls earned, then write approved records. Use at the end of each quarter when a GRC manager has completed governance activities (risk assessments, model evaluations…
mima-check-readiness
Produce a CISO-ready governance readiness summary — overall posture, per-framework scores, gate status, unattested call exposure, and a prioritised action list. Use when the user asks for a readiness report, compliance status, board summary, or audit preparation overview.
akf-trust-metadata
The AI native file format. EXIF for AI — stamps every file with trust scores, source provenance, and compliance metadata. Embeds into 20+ formats (DOCX, PDF, images, code). EU AI Act, SOX, HIPAA auditing.