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 mehrad-dm/mastermind --skill clarifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mehrad-dm/mastermindWrote 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/mehrad-dm/mastermind/clarify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mehrad-dm/mastermind/clarify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mehrad-dm/mastermind/clarify/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/mehrad-dm/mastermind/clarify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mehrad-dm/mastermind/clarify.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 | $0.00108 | $0.00987 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00043 | $0.00395 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00197 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00099 |
Grade A, and why
clarify 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 15d 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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MasterMind: Clarify
Your last answer failed. That is the fact to accept before writing anything else. Do not defend it, do not repeat it louder, and do not simply cut its length: a shorter version of an unclear thing is still unclear.
Read ~/.mastermind/engineering/core/clarity.md for the register. Use the project's own terms from
.mastermind/brief.md if it exists.
Work out what actually failed
One of four things went wrong. The repair differs for each, so name it before you rewrite.
| What failed | The repair |
|---|---|
| Missing context: you started in the middle | Lead with why this exists, then what it does |
| Vocabulary: a term they do not hold | Name it once in their words, then use one word for it |
| Shape: a structure prose cannot carry | Draw it. See below |
| Volume: correct, and too much at once | One claim, then stop and ask what they want next |
Two forms. Pick, do not offer a menu
Words. Lead with the point. Short sentences, active voice, one instruction each, no hedging. State what you would do and why, in the order they need it, not the order you discovered it.
A picture, when the thing has a shape: how parts connect, what calls what, what changed, what a sequence does, what the data looks like. Reach for the lightest form that carries it:
- a file layout: a shallow tree, one line of responsibility per entry, for where things live
- a call stack: an indented call tree, for what happens in what order
- a component tree: the same for a UI, keeping the state and the boundaries, dropping the rest
- types and signatures: the shape of the data, which is often the whole answer
- pseudocode: for an algorithm, where real code carries noise the reader does not need
- a table: for a comparison or a set of options
- a diff, and not only of code: mark a call tree, a file layout or a state machine with
+and-to show a change against a shape the reader already holds - a mermaid diagram: state and sequence diagrams, only when the relationships genuinely need one. Nine boxes at most; past that, draw an overview and a detail. Remove every box, arrow and label whose removal loses nothing, and give emphasis to one or two elements, never four
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.
- 15d ago Changed · +3 lines · +108 tokens per session 210fe243b221
- 1mo ago First seen · 66 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 4df6a592b210
clarify is a skill published in the GitHub repository mehrad-dm/mastermind (23 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 108 tokens to every session and 987 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
st-full-workflow
Use when the user asks to run the complete end-to-end Strikethroo workflow for a work order in one shot in this repository — triggers include full workflow, end-to-end, plan and execute, do everything, run the whole strikethroo workflow. Do not use when the user wants only one stage (create a plan, generate tasks, or…
code-sec-review
Static security review that hunts exploitable vulnerabilities, prioritizing unauthenticated and cross-tenant attack paths.
agent-decision
Deterministic self-evaluation rubric for decision escalations — scored every run using the FRAME framework.
code-quality-review
Reviews code and plans against the project's coding rules.
review-loop
Two-mode review loop — single reviewer per epic, three reviewers for full branch.
setup-new-acpx-key
Configure the API key (or other credential) for a registered ACPX agentid (claude/codex/cursor/gemini/qwen/copilot/pi/droid/iflow/kilocode/kimi/kiro/opencode/tlamatini) end-to-end across data.keys, config.json (top-level + acpx.agents. .env), regensecrets.py, and verification via acpdoctor.