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-help/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-help)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-help"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-help/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-help"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-help.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00718 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00287 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
namba-help 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.
What it actually says
State effect: read-only guidance. Do not mutate repository state.
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-help, asks how to use NambaAI, wants to know which command or skill to use next, or needs a read-only walkthrough of the current repository workflow.
Behavior:
- Stay read-only. Do not mutate repository state, create a SPEC, run validators, or invoke workflow commands just to answer a usage question.
- Prefer
.namba/and generated repository docs as the primary source of truth:README*.md,docs/getting-started*.md,docs/workflow-guide*.md,.namba/codex/README.md, and relevant repo skills under.agents/skills/. - Explain the practical differences between
$namba-create,namba project,namba codex access,namba plan,namba harness,namba fix,namba run,namba queue,namba sync,namba pr,namba land,namba release,namba regen,namba update,$namba-review-resolve,$namba-release, andnamba doctorwhen those distinctions matter to the user's goal. - When the user describes an outcome, recommend the next Namba command or skill concretely instead of giving a vague taxonomy.
- If the user asks about pre-implementation review flow, explain when to use
$namba-plan-reviewversus the individual review skills. - Distinguish
$namba-createfromnamba planandnamba harness: use create when the user wants repo-local skills or custom agents directly, and use plan or harness when the user needs a SPEC package first. - If the user asks about a specific command, include concrete invocation examples and mention whether the path is read-only guidance, planning, execution, or GitHub handoff.
- If repository docs and executable/config evidence disagree, call out the mismatch instead of smoothing it over.
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 · 30 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A fa5ce8821398
namba-help is a skill published in the GitHub repository Nam-Cheol/namba-ai (11 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 718 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…