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 agentmods add skills/nick-railsback/skill-engine/applynpx skills add nick-railsback/skill-engine --skill applygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nick-railsback/skill-engineWhat 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 | $0.00036 | $0.00929 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00464 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00186 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
apply 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 — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Apply
Promote a reviewed proposal into the live contextualizer. Atomic-rename per file. Preserve the REVIEW.md audit trail in the live tree. Refuse to run when the proposal has not been signed off, when the sign-off is reject, or when more than one Step 3 box is ticked.
When to invoke
After /skill-engine:review <name> has run, the user has filled Step 1 of REVIEW.md, re-run review to populate Step 2, ticked verdict boxes on each disagreement (optional — for the engine's own read; the engine does not consume these), and ticked exactly one Step 3 box (reviewed or provisional).
Resolving <name> and <install>
Same resolution as /skill-engine:review: <name> is the slug without the -context suffix; bare invocation works when exactly one *-context.proposed/ exists under <install>. See review/SKILL.md § Resolving <name> for the full rule.
Pre-promotion gates
Run these in order; any failure halts the apply and exits non-zero without
mutating either tree: the manifest exists and parses, REVIEW.md exists
and parses, the review loop actually ran (not just a ticked box — two
literal-content checks against Step 1/Step 2), exactly one Step 3 box is
ticked and it isn't reject, and the live tree hasn't changed since
staging (per-entry content-hash comparison against the manifest's
sha_before/sha_after). The exact checks, halt messages, and per-status
hash rules are in
references/pre-promotion-gates.md.
Promotion, review-state and preamble reconciliation
Promote file-by-file from the manifest (resume-safe per entry), then —
before moving the audit trail — write research/review-state.json (the
persisted sign-off ledger) and reconcile the provisional-mode preamble
block in the live SKILL.md, then move REVIEW.md + manifest.json into
the live .review/ and remove the emptied proposed directory. The
per-status promotion rules, the ledger schema, and the preamble's exact
delimiter format and four reconciliation cases are in
references/promotion-and-reconciliation.md.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 59 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 101f406ef503
apply is a skill published in the GitHub repository nick-railsback/skill-engine (2 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 929 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
skill-creator
Create or improve Zhin Agent skills (SKILL.md). Use when asked to add a skill, write SKILL.md, document a repeatable agent workflow, or refine skill frontmatter/keywords. Triggers: 创建技能, 写 SKILL, skill-creator, 加 skill.
skill-sync-checker
Detects content drift between skill files and their source documents. Helps maintain skills that are derived from other documentation by comparing content and flagging outdated sections.
tech-design-generation
Generates professional Technical Design Documents following industry-standard engineering practices. This skill activates when the user asks to write a technical design, create an architecture design, draft a design doc, write a technical proposal, do system design, create a technical design document, write an RFC…
test-cases-generation
Generates structured test case sets with multi-dimensional coverage from project code analysis or specification documents. This skill activates when the user asks to write test cases, generate tests, supplement tests, create test coverage, or improve test completeness. It auto-scans the project to extract testable…
erpaval
Workflow for autonomous software development with the Kiro CLI (open Agent Skills standard). Classifiers route scope, complexity, directory state, and spec readiness before committing to Explore / Research / Plan / Act / Validate, then close the loop with a Compound step that persists lessons to .erpaval/solutions/…
idea
Use when exploring a new idea before writing formal specifications. Guides users through iterative discovery, research, and critical analysis to crystallize vague ideas into validated requirement drafts. Includes anti-pseudo-requirement checks, competitive research, demand evidence gathering, and "What if we don't…