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 marker-io/mcp-skills --skill marker-syncgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/marker-io/mcp-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/marker-io/mcp-skills/marker-sync)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marker-io/mcp-skills/marker-sync"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marker-io/mcp-skills/marker-sync/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/marker-io/mcp-skills/marker-sync"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marker-io/mcp-skills/marker-sync.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 | $0.00064 | $0.00890 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00445 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00178 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00089 |
Grade A, and why
marker-sync 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 9d 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 — 66 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
marker-sync
Keep Marker.io and an external tracker (GitHub Issues, Linear, Jira) consistent: full diagnostic context flows into the tracker, resolution flows back to Marker. Eliminates the "closed in the tracker, still open in Marker.io" mismatch.
When to use
"Pull new marker issues into <tracker>", "enrich these tickets with marker context", "mark the done ones ready to test in github and resolved in marker", "are marker and linear out of sync".
Prerequisites
A connected tracker. Use whatever the user has: GitHub via the gh CLI, Linear via mcp__linear__*,
Jira via its MCP/CLI. If none is connected, say so and stop.
Matching issues across systems
Match a Marker.io issue to its tracker item by, in order: an explicit Marker link/ID in the tracker item, the issue URL, then a close title match. When unsure, list the candidate pairs and ask.
Steps
- Pull new/updated Marker.io issues (
issues_list, recent window). Pull the corresponding tracker items in one pass. - Enrich thin tracker items: for any tracker ticket missing diagnostic context, add the Marker
screenshot link, console errors, failing network requests, and browser/OS from
issue_get_context(plus drill-downs). Propose the edit before writing to the tracker. - Reconcile status both ways. Build a table of every pair and its two statuses. Flag mismatches (resolved on one side, open on the other).
- On close: when a fix has landed, set the tracker state (e.g. "Ready to Test") and the Marker.io
status to its resolved equivalent (
issue_update_status, discovered viaproject_get), and document the root cause + fix as a comment on both sides (comment_createon Marker).
Gating
Every write (tracker edits, Marker status changes, comments) is proposed as a table first and applied only after confirmation. Never close an issue on one side without updating the other.
Operating rules
This skill drives the Marker.io MCP. Read tools: projects_list, project_get, project_list_users,
list_issue_types, issues_list, issue_get, issue_get_context, issue_get_screenshot,
issue_get_attachments, issue_get_console_log, issue_get_network_request. Write tools:
issue_update_status, issue_update_assignee, issue_update_priority, issue_update_type,
comment_create.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 66 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A 1dd275e0fbaa
marker-sync is a skill published in the GitHub repository marker-io/mcp-skills (7 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 890 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
meeting-notes-to-tasks
Converts unstructured meeting notes into structured, assigned, time-bounded action items. Never leave a meeting without knowing who does what by when.
task-decomposition
Breaks features into atomic, independently verifiable tasks. No task should take more than 4 hours. Unblocks parallel work and reduces integration risk.
performance-optimization
Optimizes application performance across frontend, backend, queries, and databases. Use when performance requirements exist, when you suspect performance regressions, when Core Web Vitals or load times need improvement, when N+1 query patterns need fixing, or when profiling reveals bottlenecks.
constraint-driven-development
Establishes a project's quality bar as a written contract and stops agents quietly lowering it. Interviews the user on which dimensions matter, supplies sane default thresholds when they have no number in mind, records everything in CONSTRAINTS.md, and watches the diff for a weakened bar — new @ts-ignore or…
doubt-driven-development
Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands. Use when correctness matters more than speed, when working in unfamiliar code, when stakes are high (production, security-sensitive logic, irreversible operations), or any time a confident output would be cheaper to verify now…
test-driven-development
Drives development with tests. Use when implementing any logic, fixing any bug, or changing any behavior. Use when you need to prove that code works, when a bug report arrives, or when you're about to modify existing functionality.