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 NoesisVision/nasde-toolkit --skill nasde-benchmark-calibrationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NoesisVision/nasde-toolkitWrote 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/noesisvision/nasde-toolkit/nasde-benchmark-calibration)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/noesisvision/nasde-toolkit/nasde-benchmark-calibration"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/noesisvision/nasde-toolkit/nasde-benchmark-calibration/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/noesisvision/nasde-toolkit/nasde-benchmark-calibration"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/noesisvision/nasde-toolkit/nasde-benchmark-calibration.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00171 | $0.01860 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00086 | $0.00930 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00372 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00186 |
Grade A, and why
nasde-benchmark-calibration 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 9d 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 — 139 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
NASDE Benchmark Calibration
Close the loop between the LLM-as-a-Judge and a human reviewer. The judge scores trials against
assessment_criteria.md (per task) and assessment_dimensions.json (benchmark-wide) — but an LLM
judge is an imperfect grader, and how it reads the rubric may diverge from how a human grades the code.
This skill publishes trial diffs + scores as Pull/Merge Requests for human review, pulls the comments
back, and proposes concrete rubric edits.
This is the third skill in the benchmark lifecycle: nasde-benchmark-creator writes the rubric,
nasde-benchmark-runner runs trials and scores them, and this skill calibrates the rubric against
human judgment before the benchmark is frozen.
Prerequisites
- A sink repository that already exists (creation is out of scope). Configure it in
nasde.toml:[calibration] repo = "https://github.com/Org/nasde-calibration" # full URL or owner/repo slug # platform = "gitlab" # only needed for a bare slug or a self-hosted host # base_branch = "main" # throttle_sec = 2.0 - The platform CLI for that repo's host:
gh(GitHub) orglab(GitLab), installed and logged in (gh auth login/glab auth login). The platform is auto-detected from the repo URL host. nasde never handles tokens — the CLI's keyring does. See ADR-010. giton PATH.
Workflow
1. Decide which trials to calibrate
Calibration is about the criteria, not individual runs. Discuss with the user which trials to
publish: a representative trial per (task, variant) is usually enough; publishing every repetition
floods the sink with PRs. Selecting trials is the agent's judgment here — there is no --select flag
yet (that logic may move into the CLI once the workflow settles).
You can pass job directories (all their trials) or individual trial directories — mixed is fine.
2. Publish
nasde calibrate publish jobs/<job>/<trial>__<id> -C <project_dir>
# or a whole job:
nasde calibrate publish jobs/<job> -C <project_dir>
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 139 lines · 171 tokens per session scan A 3e066fbfdcfa
nasde-benchmark-calibration is a skill published in the GitHub repository NoesisVision/nasde-toolkit (12 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 171 tokens to every session and 1,860 once invoked, about $0.0009 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
remove-ai-slops
Removes AI-generated code smells from branch changes or an explicit file list behind regression tests. Use when the user asks to clean up, deslop, or remove AI-slop patterns from recent changes.
codex-loop
Fix Elixir/Phoenix code until Codex CLI review comes back clean — bounded review, fix, verify loop before opening a PR. Use when codex is installed and you want an external cross-model critic on your changes before pushing.
codex-ab
Run an A/B codex review experiment — holistic codex review vs 3 focused dimension passes (security, ecto, liveview) on the branch diff, classify findings, report a panel-value verdict. Use when the branch is fresh, before any codex review runs.
059-design-atdd
Use when reviewing whether an OpenSpec change's execution goal, acceptance criteria, and implementation or verification tasks are aligned. This should trigger for requests such as Review this OpenSpec change with ATDD; Check acceptance criteria against tasks; Find acceptance criteria without task coverage; Detect…
056-design-avoid-breaking-changes
Use when you need to review a plan, OpenSpec change, specification, or implementation proposal for breaking-change risk across commands, skills, generated outputs, XML sources, README/docs, tests, CI, APIs, schemas, configuration, data, migration, and release guidance. This should trigger for requests such as Review…
053-design-simple-rules
Use when Java design, refactoring, or implementation tradeoffs should be evaluated with Kent Beck's simple design rules, including passes the tests, reveals intention, has no duplication, and has the fewest elements. This should trigger for requests such as Apply simple design rules; Review this design with Beck's…