PM Skills is a collection of plain-Markdown instructions that teach AI assistants structured methods for handling professional, personal, and life-admin tasks. People use it with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Cursor, Codex, and other supported agents for work such as writing product requirements, reviewing documents, or planning difficult situations.
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 mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill ai-agent-reliabilitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-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/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/ai-agent-reliability)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/ai-agent-reliability"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/ai-agent-reliability/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/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/ai-agent-reliability"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/ai-agent-reliability.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 | $0.00135 | $0.01128 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00054 | $0.00451 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00226 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00113 |
Grade A, and why
ai-agent-reliability 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 2d 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 — 67 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
AI-Agent Reliability
An AI agent that works in a demo and one you can trust in production are different things — the gap is everything that happens when input is messy, the model hallucinates, a tool call goes wrong, or an error fails silently. This maps where your agent can fail and the specific checks that catch each, scaled to the stakes, plus a rollout that earns trust incrementally — so "works sometimes" becomes "works reliably."
What This Skill Produces
- A failure map — where this agent can go wrong: bad/unexpected input, hallucinated output, wrong or malformed tool calls, unhandled edge cases, silent failures, and runaway loops
- The catching checks per failure — input validation, output verification, evals on real cases, schema/format checks on tool calls, human-in-the-loop gates, and monitoring/alerts
- An eval approach — testing on a real set of cases (including the hard ones) so quality is measured, not assumed, and regressions are caught
- Human-in-the-loop placement — where a human must approve, scaled to consequence (irreversible/external actions gated, low-stakes automated)
- A right-sized plan — reliability effort matched to the stakes, not gold-plating a low-risk toy or under-testing a high-risk system
- A trust-building rollout — shadow mode → low-stakes → expand, with monitoring, rather than shipping it everywhere and hoping
Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided:
- The agent — what it does, what tools/actions it takes, what it touches
- The stakes — what a failure costs (drives how hard to test and gate)
- Where it fails now — the flakiness you've seen (points at the weak spots)
- Your setup — the framework/tools, and whether you can add evals/monitoring
Framework: Map Failures, Catch Each, Earn Trust
- Enumerate the failure modes. Walk the agent's path — input, reasoning, tool calls, output, actions — and name where each step can break. You can't guard what you haven't named.
- Attach a check to each. Validation for input, verification for output, schema checks for tool calls, evals for quality, gates for consequential actions — a specific catch per failure.
- Build real evals. A set of representative and hard cases, scored — so you know it works and catch regressions before users do.
- Gate by consequence. Irreversible or external actions get a human check; low-stakes steps run free. Match the gate to the cost.
- Right-size it. Don't over-engineer a low-risk helper or under-test a system that moves money or data — effort follows stakes.
- Roll out to earn trust. Shadow mode, then low-stakes live, then expand — with monitoring and alerts — so reliability is proven, not assumed.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 67 lines · 135 tokens per session scan A 95f1ee6004ea
ai-agent-reliability is a skill published in the GitHub repository mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills (1,449 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 135 tokens to every session and 1,128 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-10-12.
Other skills, from other repositories
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…