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 oborchers/fractional-cto --skill guidelines-compliancegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oborchers/fractional-ctoWrote 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/oborchers/fractional-cto/guidelines-compliance)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/oborchers/fractional-cto/guidelines-compliance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oborchers/fractional-cto/guidelines-compliance/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/oborchers/fractional-cto/guidelines-compliance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oborchers/fractional-cto/guidelines-compliance.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 | $0.00084 | $0.02092 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00837 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00418 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00209 |
Grade A, and why
guidelines-compliance 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 5d 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 — 205 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Your Rules, Enforced
Pedantic principles are universal. But every project also has its own rules — captured in CLAUDE.md files scattered across the repository. These files form an inheritance hierarchy, and every line of code must comply with every applicable guideline in its ancestor chain.
A pristine codebase follows both universal principles AND its own documented rules. This skill teaches you how to find, parse, and enforce project-specific guidelines.
The CLAUDE.md Inheritance Model
CLAUDE.md files follow a directory-scoped inheritance model:
- Root
CLAUDE.mdapplies to every file in the repository - Nested
CLAUDE.md(e.g.,src/CLAUDE.md) adds rules on top of its parent — it does NOT replace them - Deeper nesting (e.g.,
src/features/auth/CLAUDE.md) adds more rules on top of both ancestors
Rules are additive. A file at src/features/auth/LoginForm.tsx must follow:
- Root
CLAUDE.md(project-wide conventions) src/CLAUDE.md(source code conventions, if it exists)src/features/auth/CLAUDE.md(auth-specific conventions, if it exists)
There is no override mechanism. If the root says "use snake_case" and a nested file says "use PascalCase for components," both rules apply in their respective contexts. If they genuinely conflict, that is a bug in the CLAUDE.md hierarchy — flag it.
The Directory Walk-Up Algorithm
To find all applicable CLAUDE.md files for a given source file:
- Start at the file's directory
- Check if a
CLAUDE.mdexists in that directory - Move one directory up
- Repeat until you reach the repository root
- Always include the root
CLAUDE.mdif it exists - Deduplicate and order from root (broadest) to deepest (most specific)
For a file at src/features/auth/components/LoginForm.tsx, the walk produces:
CLAUDE.md ← root (project-wide)
src/CLAUDE.md ← source conventions (if exists)
src/features/CLAUDE.md ← feature conventions (if exists)
src/features/auth/CLAUDE.md ← auth conventions (if exists)
src/features/auth/components/CLAUDE.md ← component conventions (if exists)
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 5d ago First seen · 205 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A 1951d16ac2ff
guidelines-compliance is a skill published in the GitHub repository oborchers/fractional-cto (32 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 2,092 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-10-13.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…