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 natea/ExoMind --skill resolving-sync-conflictsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/natea/ExoMindWrote 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/natea/exomind/resolving-sync-conflicts)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/natea/exomind/resolving-sync-conflicts"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/natea/exomind/resolving-sync-conflicts/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/natea/exomind/resolving-sync-conflicts"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/natea/exomind/resolving-sync-conflicts.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 | $0.00000 | $0.02753 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01101 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00551 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00275 |
Grade A, and why
resolving-sync-conflicts 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 1mo 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 — 416 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Resolving Sync Conflicts
Overview
Handle synchronization conflicts between local Life OS data and remote Todoist data when both have been modified.
When to Use
- After bi-directional sync detects conflicting changes
- When local and remote versions of a task differ
- Before overwriting any user data
- When merge strategy is unclear
Conflict Types
1. Title Conflict
- Local: "Buy groceries for dinner party"
- Remote: "Buy groceries"
- Cause: Title edited in both places
2. Due Date Conflict
- Local: "2025-10-25"
- Remote: "2025-10-27"
- Cause: Due date changed in both systems
3. Status Conflict
- Local: Completed (checked off locally)
- Remote: Active (still open in Todoist)
- Cause: Status changed in both places
4. Priority Conflict
- Local: Priority 1 (high)
- Remote: Priority 3 (low)
- Cause: Priority adjusted differently
5. Project/Context Conflict
- Local: Moved to "Work" project
- Remote: Moved to "Personal" project
- Cause: Organization changed in both systems
6. Content Conflict
- Local: "Call dentist - schedule cleaning"
- Remote: "Call dentist - emergency appointment"
- Cause: Task content diverged
Resolution Strategies
1. Keep Local (User's Changes Win)
// User's recent edits take priority
// Overwrite remote with local version
// Use when: User explicitly modified locally and wants to keep it
2. Keep Remote (Todoist Wins)
// Remote Todoist data takes priority
// Overwrite local with remote version
// Use when: Remote is more authoritative or user prefers Todoist version
3. Merge Both (Combine Changes)
// Intelligently combine both versions
// Use when: Changes are complementary, not contradictory
// Example: Merge title additions, combine tags
4. Manual Edit
// Let user manually resolve
// Present both versions side-by-side
// User creates final merged version
// Use when: Automatic merge would lose data
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 416 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A cf7ea378ab1b
resolving-sync-conflicts is a skill published in the GitHub repository natea/ExoMind (20 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,753 tokens. 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
story-readiness
Checks whether a story is ready to implement: clear acceptance criteria, no open questions, valid ADR and dependencies. Use when the user asks if a story, or the sprint's stories, are ready to start or build.
recipe-create-meet-space
Create a Google Meet meeting space and share the join link.
atmos-config
Atmos root configuration: atmos.yaml discovery, precedence, deep merging, basepath, imports, minimal bootstrap, and routing to narrower Atmos skills.
workthreads
SpecStory Workthreads - a weekly work-thread rollup across a team's repos from SpecStory coding histories (any agent - Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and more). It groups the window's sessions into threads of work per project and labels each new / open / recently closed, so a lead sees what shipped, what is still…
qa-project-bootstrap
Onboard a new QA engineer to an existing codebase, or audit an existing test architecture. Produces a 30-day ramp plan: codebase orientation, framework walkthrough, test architecture audit, mentorship pairing, and first-test guidance. Use when: "QA onboarding," "new tester," "ramp up," "test architecture audit,"…
handle-linkedin-connection-request-signal
Use this skill when someone sends a team member an inbound LinkedIn connection request. An inbound request is a deliberate, ACTIVE first-party intent signal — meaningfully stronger than a passive profile view — and it deserves different scoring rules. The skill resolves and enriches the requester, gates them through…