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 nishilbhave/codeprobe --skill codeprobe-error-handlinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nishilbhave/codeprobeWrote 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/nishilbhave/codeprobe/codeprobe-error-handling)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nishilbhave/codeprobe/codeprobe-error-handling"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nishilbhave/codeprobe/codeprobe-error-handling/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/nishilbhave/codeprobe/codeprobe-error-handling"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nishilbhave/codeprobe/codeprobe-error-handling.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 | $0.00090 | $0.01971 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00788 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00394 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00197 |
Grade A, and why
codeprobe-error-handling 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 — 118 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Standalone Mode
If invoked directly (not via the orchestrator), you must first:
- Read
../codeprobe/shared-preamble.md(resolve relative to this SKILL.md's location — the siblingcodeprobeskill directory — not the user's project) for the output contract, execution modes, and constraints. - Load applicable reference files from
../codeprobe/references/(same resolution) based on the project's tech stack. - Default to
fullmode unless the user specifies otherwise.
Error Handling & Resilience Checker
Domain Scope
This sub-skill detects error handling and resilience issues across these categories:
- Swallowed Exceptions — Empty catch blocks, catch-and-log-only without rethrow/handle
- Missing Error Handling — External API calls without try/catch, unhandled promise rejections
- Error Information — Generic error messages, leaking internals, missing structured responses
- Retry & Circuit Breaker — No timeout on external calls, no retry for transient failures
- Validation — Missing input validation, implicit null assumptions, type coercion bugs
- Transaction Safety — Multi-step DB operations without transactions, missing rollback
- Logging — No logging on critical paths, missing correlation IDs
What It Does NOT Flag
- Sensitive data in logs — covered by
codeprobe-security(SECprefix). This sub-skill flags missing logging and structural issues like no correlation IDs, not data leakage. - Test files — test exception handling follows different patterns and is expected to be simpler.
- Framework-generated exception handlers (e.g., Laravel's
Handler.php, Next.js error boundaries that are intentionally minimal) — these are scaffolded defaults, not developer oversights. - CLI scripts with intentionally simple error handling (print + exit) — command-line tools often use a valid pattern of printing an error and exiting with a non-zero code.
- Catch blocks that deliberately swallow specific known-harmless exceptions with a comment explaining why — if the developer documented the rationale, respect the decision.
- Issues that are primarily security vulnerabilities (e.g., authentication bypasses, injection, data exposure) even if they also have error handling implications — these are covered by
codeprobe-security. If both sub-skills flag the same location, the orchestrator will deduplicate and keep the security finding as primary.
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 · 118 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A 5948d9088477
codeprobe-error-handling is a skill published in the GitHub repository nishilbhave/codeprobe (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 1,971 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
platform-apex-generate
Primary Apex authoring skill for class generation, refactoring, and review. ALWAYS ACTIVATE when the user mentions Apex, .cls, triggers, or asks to create/refactor a class (service, selector, domain, batch, queueable, schedulable, invocable, DTO, utility, interface, abstract, exception, REST resource). Use this skill…
flow-next-impl-review
Carmack-level implementation review of changes via the configured backend. Use when asked to review code or a diff in a flow-next repo.
api-contract-review
Use when auditing CloudBase cloud API wrappers, MCP tools, generated action metadata, or related docs for outdated or incorrect action names, parameters, casing, request shapes, or missing contract tests, especially during periodic quality review or before preparing corrective PRs.
ring:migrating-to-lib-observability
Migrating a Lerian Go app off lib-commons observability imports (deprecated shims or removed APIs) to lib-observability via a fixed mapping table, then bumps go.mod and validates the build; ring:backend-go applies the edits. Covers log/zap/runtime/assert, opentelemetry/tracing, HTTP middleware, context helpers, and…
flow-next-resolve-pr
Resolve PR review feedback. Fetches unresolved threads, triages, fixes, replies and resolves via GraphQL. Use when asked to address review comments.
ring:mapping-streaming-events
Mapping the eventable points in a Lerian Go service where lib-streaming should emit past-tense, durable, tenant-scoped business events, producing a PM-validated event catalog and instrumentation-map.json for ring:instrumenting-streaming-events. Three-pass discovery (Survey, Slice, Mark) with a scope fence and delivery…