Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add nikolaypaskov/claudeconf-plugin/plugin install claudeconfWrote 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/nikolaypaskov/claudeconf-plugin/claudeconf)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nikolaypaskov/claudeconf-plugin/claudeconf"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nikolaypaskov/claudeconf-plugin/claudeconf/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/nikolaypaskov/claudeconf-plugin/claudeconf"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nikolaypaskov/claudeconf-plugin/claudeconf.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 | $0.00078 | $0.05482 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.02741 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.01096 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00548 |
Grade A, and why
claudeconf 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 8d 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 — 346 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Wire a pinned, standard-tool quality + security harness for the current project by researching the best CURRENT tools for its stack(s) and generating the artifacts the harness contract requires. The harness covers nine milestones across five tiers; it is deterministic, network-free in the unit tier, and idempotent. You research the tools — this procedure never hardcodes per-language choices.
Follow these steps IN ORDER. Do not skip the human-review gate. Do not commit before approval.
Capability routing (who executes what)
Route by VERIFIABILITY — and "verifiable" means semantically checked by a deterministic verifier downstream, not merely schema-valid or exiting 0:
- Most capable model, maximum reasoning — every step that CREATES decisions the verifiers then enforce: detection (Step 2 — errors mis-scope everything), brainstorm (Step 3), research and tool selection (Step 4), the contract (Step 5), the INTEGRATION of Step 6 (scope, exclusions, scanner rules, e2e fidelity and OWNERSHIP are semantic; a subtly wrong but schema-valid wiring passes every check), the ownership gate, and the Step 8 presentation. Adversarial review of the result is top-tier work at any time.
- Delegable to cheaper/faster models or subagents — pure FAN-OUT that deterministic checks fully arbitrate: applying an already-decided pattern across files, running Step 7's commands and registry confirmations (the scripts decide; the model reads their output), and mechanical rewrites the executable gate re-proves.
- Verification itself is never model work. If a cheaper model's error would survive the checker plus the executable gate, that task was not delegable.
Modes — decide this BEFORE Step 1
| Mode | Use it when | Steps |
|---|---|---|
generate |
default: no harness, or the user asks for one | 1–9 |
upgrade |
the harness moves to a newer conformance profile | 1–2, then modes.md + the migrations.md delta, then 6–9 |
refresh |
tool VERSIONS move inside the current profile | 1–2, then modes.md, then 4–9; the profile never changes |
What ships with it
20 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.
- references/.gitkeep 0 B
- references/agent-hardening.md 9.9 KB
- references/constitution.md 17 KB
- references/doctor-checklist.md 5.6 KB
- references/harness-contract.md 75 KB
- references/migrations.md 18 KB
- references/modes.md 5.3 KB
- references/patterns/ci-github-actions.md 10 KB
- references/patterns/e2e.md 6.5 KB
- references/patterns/elixir.md 2.3 KB
- references/patterns/kotlin.md 2.2 KB
- references/patterns/node.md 5.8 KB
- references/patterns/python.md 3.8 KB
- references/patterns/README.md 1.2 KB
- references/patterns/security.md 9.2 KB
- references/patterns/swift.md 1.8 KB
- references/wiring-principles.md 17 KB
- scripts/claudeconf-check.mjs 237 KB runs code
- scripts/vendor/js-yaml.mjs 123 KB runs code
- scripts/vendor/VENDOR.md 3.2 KB
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 346 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A 9792644491ba
claudeconf is a skill published in the GitHub repository nikolaypaskov/claudeconf-plugin (3 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 5,482 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
Code Coverage Analysis
Measure and enforce test coverage with Istanbul/nyc, c8, Jest, and Vitest. Covers branch versus line coverage, per-directory thresholds, CI gates, and correctly excluding generated code from reports.
browser-check
Drive a real browser and come back with a MEASUREMENT rather than an impression - console errors and >=400 responses as counts, computed styles as JSON when appearance is disputed. Use when work touches UI, when a review must verify one, or when fidelity-gate asks for its measurement.
argot-check
Score your working changes with argot — flag code foreign to this repo's own patterns (unfamiliar dependencies, APIs, constructs), functions the repo already has, code filed in the wrong place, imports that break the repo's layering, and tests weakened, disabled, or deleted alongside a production change — before…
argot-setup-ci
Wire argot into a repository's GitHub Actions as a non-blocking configured check on every pull request — a job summary plus code-scanning annotations. Use when the user wants argot "in CI", "on PRs", "as a GitHub Action", or asks to "set up argot CI". Distinct from argot-setup (local checking) and argot-review-pr…
writing-checks
Build the machinery that enforces a convention instead of documenting it — PreToolUse guards that block an action before it runs, CI gates that judge the worktree, selftests that prove a check can turn red, and structural tests that enforce layering. Use this whenever a rule keeps getting violated despite being…
watch-commit
Watch a GitHub commit for CI status changes using the gh-watch extension. Use when the user wants to monitor a commit's CI checks, wait for a build to finish, or track CI progress on a specific SHA.