Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to MichiBl/Claude-Code-Default-Repo. 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/MichiBl/Claude-Code-Default-Repo/main/.claude/skills/feature/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MichiBl/Claude-Code-Default-RepoWrote 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/michibl/claude-code-default-repo/feature)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/michibl/claude-code-default-repo/feature"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/michibl/claude-code-default-repo/feature/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/michibl/claude-code-default-repo/feature"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/michibl/claude-code-default-repo/feature.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 | $0.00098 | $0.02804 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00039 | $0.01122 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00561 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00280 |
Grade A, and why
feature 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 29d 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 — 212 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/feature — Agent-Team-Pipeline
Du steuerst als Haupt-Agent ein Feature durch eine strikte, sequentielle Pipeline mit Bestätigungs-Gates. Subagenten liefern Spezifikation, Plan, Review und QA — die Implementierung machst du selbst und delegierst sie nicht (du hast den vollen Konversationskontext; jedes Handoff kostet Kontext).
Wann nutzen / wann nicht
Nutzen: neues Feature, neue Integration, Refactor über mehrere Dateien, alles was Schema + Backend + UI zugleich berührt, oder wenn der User es explizit verlangt.
Nicht nutzen: Typo oder Einzeiler-Fix (direkt fixen), Bugfix oder
kleines Refactoring mit klarem Ziel (-> /fix), reines
Dependency-Update, fehlender Test für bereits gebauten Code (qa-engineer
direkt aufrufen), Exploration/Q&A (direkt beantworten).
Preconditions (Hard-Stop)
Prüfe vor dem Start beide Voraussetzungen; fehlt eine, stoppe sofort und bootstrappe sie NIE als Nebenprodukt eines Feature-Laufs:
-
Test-Infrastruktur — die QA-Phase schreibt und führt echte Tests aus. Es braucht einen konfigurierten Test-Runner UND mindestens eine Testdatei im Repo. Fehlt sie, frage den User:
"Die /feature-Pipeline braucht funktionierende Test-Infrastruktur. Soll ich die zuerst mit
/bootstrapaufsetzen (eigene Aufgabe), bevor wir das Feature starten?" -
Lint-Gate — verify.sh, CI und QA linten nur, was existiert. Es braucht einen eingerichteten Linter (Node:
lint-Script inpackage.json; Python: ruff in den Dev-Dependencies; andere Stacks:.claude/hooks/verify-project.shvorhanden). Fehlt er, frage den User:"Das Projekt hat kein Lint-Gate — verify.sh, CI und QA würden ohne Linter laufen. Soll ich zuerst mit
/bootstrapeinen einrichten (eigene Aufgabe)?"
Slug-Ableitung
Leite aus dem User-Argument einen kebab-case-<slug> ab (Kleinbuchstaben,
Bindestriche, keine Sonderzeichen). Alle Artefakte leben unter
docs/features/<slug>/. Nenne den Slug dem User zu Beginn; bei Unklarheit
per AskUserQuestion klären.
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.
- 29d ago Changed · +29 lines b94d2acc8c99
- 2mo ago First seen · 183 lines · 98 tokens per session scan A 5654cf91ff34
feature is a skill published in the GitHub repository MichiBl/Claude-Code-Default-Repo (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 98 tokens to every session and 2,804 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…