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/oleg494/coding-kit/fable-methodnpx skills add oleg494/coding-kit --skill fable-methodgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oleg494/coding-kitWhat 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 | $0.00105 | $0.03939 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.01969 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00788 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00394 |
Grade A, and why
fable-method 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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
92% identical to fable-method — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 130 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
The Fable Method
A mid-tier model that follows this loop beats a stronger model that free-styles: the quality lives in the structure, the evidence, and the honesty, not in the model. The loop is self-contained. Follow it literally. The steps structure your work, never your output: do not narrate step numbers or step headers in anything the user reads.
Usage
/fable-method <task> full loop on the task (default)
/fable-method plan <task> Steps 0-3 only: classify, define done, gather evidence, deliver the plan, stop
/fable-method audit grade the work already done in this conversation against the loop (see Modes)
/fable-method report rewrite the answer you were about to send per Step 6
Deeper material loads on demand: references/failure-modes.md (symptom to step map for 18 common agent failures), references/examples.md (full worked examples for every ask shape), references/domains/ (domain adapters, see below; domains/TEMPLATE.md is their schema and /fable-domain generates new ones), references/flowcharts.md (the whole method as decision flowcharts; follow the arrows literally when unsure how a rule routes).
Domain adapters. General/life tasks are the default domain. If the task is marketing/content, research/reporting, data analysis, business/ops, finance, legal/compliance, or design/UX, read the matching file in references/domains/ before Step 2. An adapter changes only the nouns, never the loop: what counts as evidence, who the authority is, what verification by observation means, and what the frauds are. Its minimum evidence set is binding: those items must actually be opened before acting, every time. Research is never optional; the adapter defines how much is enough. Sales/support tasks use marketing plus business-ops; education content uses research. Medical and clinical work has no adapter on purpose: it needs qualified review, not a checklist; say so when asked.
Triviality gate (run first). A task is trivial only if ALL of these are true: one file, under ~10 changed lines, no new behavior, and you already know exactly what to change without searching. If trivial: make the change, confirm it with the one obvious check (re-read the changed span, or run the build/lint/command it affects), and report in one or two sentences. Everything else, and anything you are unsure about, gets the full loop.
What ships with it
11 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/domains/business-ops.md 2.6 KB
- references/domains/data-analysis.md 2.5 KB
- references/domains/design-ux.md 2.6 KB
- references/domains/finance.md 2.6 KB
- references/domains/legal-compliance.md 2.6 KB
- references/domains/marketing.md 2.7 KB
- references/domains/research.md 2.5 KB
- references/domains/TEMPLATE.md 3.5 KB
- references/examples.md 3.4 KB
- references/failure-modes.md 4.0 KB
- references/flowcharts.md 9.5 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.
- yesterday First seen · 130 lines · 105 tokens per session scan A 92ddbedfcaaa
fable-method is a skill published in the GitHub repository oleg494/coding-kit (1 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 105 tokens to every session and 3,939 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to fable-method, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
run
Execute a named agent role with optimized instructions. Explicit invocation only ($run). Never trigger implicitly.
tip
Deliver a transformative life perspective shift and a productivity tip. Use when the user invokes /tip or wants non-technical inspiration or a fresh mental model.
agentic-security-review
Run a security and dependency audit for agent systems, tool-using AI apps, MCP/A2A integrations, or security-sensitive AI-generated code. Check slopsquatting risk, tool shadowing, rug pulls, memory/context poisoning, secrets, unsafe permissions, and common CWE patterns. Use when asked for security review, dependency…
agentic-spec
Create a structured specification before agentic coding work. Assemble the six context types, scale rigor for prototype/internal/production tasks, produce SPEC.md, and configure focused AGENTS.md boundaries. Use when asked to write a spec, plan a feature, design an agent/system, define architecture, or create…
agentic-evals
Design evaluation contracts and test plans for agentic systems. Create deterministic tests, trajectory evals, quality dimensions, gold-set criteria, and CI gates before or after implementation. Use when asked for tests first, an eval plan, success criteria, non-deterministic testing, LLM-as-judge setup, or…
agentic-production-readiness
Prepare an AI agent system for production operation. Cover SHIELD controls, sandbox/canary/production rollout, OpenTelemetry observability with GenAI semantic conventions, Agent Card drafting, governance, and post-deploy monitoring. Use for production readiness checks, go-live checklists, agent monitoring, agent…