microsoft/cat-agent-skills is a static website that catalogs reusable instruction sets and related packages for AI agents. People use it to search, filter, rate, and download skills for Cowork, Copilot Studio, and Scout, along with Copilot plugins and Scout automations. The catalogue entries are the skills, instructions, plugins, and settings displayed by the site.
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 microsoft/cat-agent-skills --skill eu-greenwashing-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/microsoft/cat-agent-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/microsoft/cat-agent-skills/eu-greenwashing-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/microsoft/cat-agent-skills/eu-greenwashing-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/microsoft/cat-agent-skills/eu-greenwashing-analysis/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/microsoft/cat-agent-skills/eu-greenwashing-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/microsoft/cat-agent-skills/eu-greenwashing-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00081 | $0.01074 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00041 | $0.00537 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00215 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00107 |
Grade A, and why
eu-greenwashing-analysis 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 12d 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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
EU Greenwashing Analysis
Run this procedure whenever a user submits a product description, marketing text, or catalog entry for review against EU rules on environmental claims (Directive 2024/825 amending 2005/29/EC, and the proposed Green Claims Directive COM/2023/166).
The output is always a structured findings report: one block per flagged claim plus a summary. Do not editorialize outside that structure.
Step 1 — Extract all environmental claims
Read the full text and list every statement that references environmental benefit, sustainability, ecological impact, or climate performance. Examples include: "eco-friendly", "carbon neutral", "100% natural", "sustainable", "green", "biodegradable", "zero emissions", "climate positive", "recycled", "plastic-free", "low carbon", "environmentally safe".
If no such claims exist → output: "No environmental claims detected — Out of Scope." and stop.
Step 2 — Assess each claim against EU greenwashing criteria
For each extracted claim, check ALL of the following:
- Vagueness / Generic claim — Is the claim broad or unsubstantiated (e.g., "eco", "green", "sustainable") with no measurable indicator, certification, or evidence cited? → High risk flag.
- Incomplete life-cycle scope — Does the claim highlight one phase of the product life cycle (e.g., recyclable packaging) while ignoring other high-impact phases (manufacturing, transport, end-of-life)? → Medium to High risk flag.
- Unverifiable / No third-party certification — Is there no independent verification, recognized EU certification, or scientific reference to support the claim? → Medium to High risk flag.
- Misleading comparison — Does the claim compare the product favorably against an irrelevant benchmark, obsolete product, or omit material information that would change the consumer's perception? → High risk flag.
- Carbon offset reliance — Does the claim (e.g., "carbon neutral", "net zero") rely primarily on carbon offsetting schemes rather than actual emission reductions? If offsets are not independently verified under EU-recognized standards → Medium to High risk flag.
- Unsupported label or logo — Does the product display an environmental label, badge, or logo that is not officially recognized in the EU, or whose criteria have not been verified? → High risk flag.
- Forward-looking claim presented as current — Is a future commitment (e.g., "will be carbon neutral by 2030") presented in a way that implies a current state? → Medium risk flag.
What ships with it
2 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.
- 12d ago First seen · 99 lines · 81 tokens per session scan A d33b9fc639e9
eu-greenwashing-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository microsoft/cat-agent-skills (69 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 81 tokens to every session and 1,074 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
specification-writing
A workflow for writing complete patent specifications from patent claims and an invention disclosure. It adapts the document to a chosen jurisdiction, such as the US, Europe, or China.
regulatory-research-fallback
Fallback workflow for regulatory research when web extraction tools fail on government PDFs.
x-scorecard
OpenSSF Scorecard for assessing open source project security. Check security best practices and compliance. Dependency: This is an x-cmd module. Install x-cmd first (see x-cmd skill for installation options). see x-cmd skill for installation.
gesellschaftsrechtliche-satzungen-agb
Für Gesellschaftsrechtliche Satzungen AGB Abgrenzung: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: gesellschaftsrechtliche-satzungen-agb.
memstack-business-gdpr
Use this skill when the user says 'GDPR', 'data protection', 'privacy compliance', 'DPA', 'DSAR', 'data subject request', 'cookie consent', 'privacy audit', 'CCPA', or asks 'do I need GDPR for this repo'. Scans the repository to detect what personal data is collected, classifies sensitivity, determines whether GDPR…
nda-review
Use when the user uploads or pastes a non-disclosure agreement and asks for review, redline, risk assessment, or a recommendation on whether to sign. Identifies missing standard protections, one-sided or unusual provisions, and operational issues; produces a structured report with severity ratings and citations to…