Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Nam-Cheol/namba-ai. 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/Nam-Cheol/namba-ai/main/.agents/skills/namba-create/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Nam-Cheol/namba-aiWrote 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/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-create)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-create"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-create/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/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-create"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-create.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 | $0.00025 | $0.00862 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00345 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00172 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00086 |
Grade A, and why
namba-create 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 2mo 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 — 35 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
State effect: preview-first mutation. Do not write repo-local skills or agents until the preview is confirmed.
Generated instruction contract for this command skill:
- Purpose: keep the role or command scope explicit, bounded, and testable.
- Boundary: honor read-only versus mutating state effects, configured sandbox mode, and assigned file or workflow ownership.
- Required output: report concrete actions, changed paths or artifacts, validation evidence, and pass/fail status or blockers.
- Pass/fail criteria: claim success only when acceptance criteria and configured validation are satisfied; otherwise name the exact blocker and impact.
- Evidence expectations: cite source artifacts such as SPEC files,
.namba/configs, diffs, test output, PR/check links, or generated manifests instead of relying on unsupported assertions. - Security responsibilities: never expose or commit secrets; treat auth, privacy, destructive commands, permission changes, and external network or credential use as security-sensitive.
- Destructive command and escalation policy: do not run destructive commands unless explicitly requested; request approval for privileged, networked, or sandbox-blocked actions only when the active approval mode allows it, and otherwise report the blocker or use a safe non-escalating path.
- Fallback implementer boundary: if a specialist path is unavailable and the main/default implementer takes over, stay within the assigned scope and preserve the same evidence and validation duties.
- Portability: keep durable guidance non-project-specific unless the current repository config or SPEC explicitly provides the project detail.
Use this skill when the user explicitly says $namba-create or asks to create a repo-local skill, a project-scoped custom agent, or both through Namba.
Behavior:
- Keep this flow skill-first. Do not introduce a documented public
namba createGo CLI command as part of this slice. - Use progressive disclosure for generated guidance: keep
SKILL.mdbodies lean and place long procedures in references, assets, or deterministic helper candidates. Do not add$CODEX_HOME/skills, third-party install flows, or app-automation dependencies. - When the installed
nambaCLI is available, use the internal adapternamba __create previewandnamba __create applywith JSON stdin/stdout as the durable generation path. Treat__createas wrapper-only plumbing, not a public command. - Run the interaction as a staged generator:
unresolved->narrowed->confirmed. - Keep each turn stateful and visible: summarize the current candidate target and the remaining unresolved items before asking the next clarifying question.
- If the user explicitly says
skill,agent, orboth, treat that directive as authoritative over any heuristic classification. - Use
sequential-thinkingwhen decomposition or clarification planning is non-trivial, usecontext7only when targeted external library or framework guidance materially helps the generated instructions, and useplaywrightonly when browser verification is actually relevant. - Before any write, present a non-mutating preview that includes the chosen output type, slug or name, intended file paths, validation plan, whether a fresh Codex session will likely be required, and the planned five-role analysis or verification record.
- Do not write files until the target, slug, paths, and overwrite decisions are explicit and the user has confirmed the preview.
- Normalize names into a safe slug, constrain writes to
.agents/skills/<slug>/SKILL.md,.codex/agents/<slug>.toml, and.codex/agents/<slug>.md, and reject path traversal, invalid slugs, silent overwrites, or incomplete agent mirror pairs. - Reject durable instructions that preserve raw unnormalized user prose, stale Claude-only primitives, or repository-policy violations.
- Record at least five independent role outputs across planning or verification when the flow advances to generation, while degrading safely if the effective same-workspace thread limit is lower than the repo default.
- Keep user-authored outputs distinct from Namba-managed built-ins so
namba regenpreserves them, and surface fresh-session guidance clearly when instruction surfaces change.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 35 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 6e6180fce938
namba-create is a skill published in the GitHub repository Nam-Cheol/namba-ai (11 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 862 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
autofix-pr
Watch a pull request and fix it from a worktree of its own - CI failures, review feedback from trusted authors and merge conflicts are fixed, pushed to the PR branch and answered on the PR under the user's git and gh identity. Usage - /autofix-pr [ | ] [--once] [--every ] [--no-reply] [--yes] [instructions]…
simplify
Review recent code changes for reuse, code quality, and efficiency, then directly apply straightforward cleanup improvements. Use when the user wants a post-implementation cleanup pass, pre-PR polish, or asks to simplify/refine recent changes. Invoke with /simplify or /simplify .
review-team
Use when assigned a review or when an authored review boundary is reached.
autofix
Review and repair current local changes until they converge, or run Qwen Code Autofix issue and review workflows from GitHub Actions.
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
swarm-pr-review
Run a graph-guided, tool-augmented PR review using context packing, parallel exploration, mandatory repository-agnostic risk-family coverage with dispatch scaled to diff size and risk, independent reviewer validation, critic challenge, and metrics writeback. Use for deep pull request review with low false-positive…