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 oleg494/coding-kit --skill finishing-a-development-branchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oleg494/coding-kitWrote 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/oleg494/coding-kit/finishing-a-development-branch)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/oleg494/coding-kit/finishing-a-development-branch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oleg494/coding-kit/finishing-a-development-branch/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/oleg494/coding-kit/finishing-a-development-branch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oleg494/coding-kit/finishing-a-development-branch.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 | $0.00028 | $0.01759 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00704 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00352 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00176 |
Grade A, and why
finishing-a-development-branch 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
97% identical to finishing-a-development-branch — 132 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 — 200 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Finishing a Development Branch
Overview
Core principle: Verify the deliverable, then perform only the integration the user authorized. A verified local task can remain local, without an integration menu, commit, push or cleanup of the user's workspace.
Step 1: Verify Tests
Use verification-before-completion: evidence must cover the final source and
the requested acceptance criteria. Run applicable checks when no valid evidence
exists; broaden for shared changes, integration policy or observed failures.
Repair task-caused failures within scope. Report unrelated/environment failures
separately; do not discard work or stop reachable repairs because a suite is red.
If no integration was requested, report the verified local result and leave the branch/workspace intact. The remaining steps apply only to authorized integration.
Step 2: Detect Environment
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
# Capture now, while still inside the workspace — Step 5 changes directory
# before cleanup (Step 6) needs this value
WORKTREE_PATH=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
This determines available integration and cleanup operations:
| State | Integration | Cleanup |
|---|---|---|
| Normal repo | Authorized merge or publication | No worktree to remove |
| Named-branch worktree | Authorized merge or publication | Provenance-based (Step 6) |
| Detached HEAD | Preserve unless a target branch/publication is authorized | Externally managed — leave in place |
Step 3: Determine Base Branch
Use the plan, upstream and repository history to establish the intended base and target. Ask only when available evidence cannot resolve a materially different destination. Do not infer authority to merge from knowing the base.
Step 4: Resolve integration authority
Execute the user's specified integration without asking them to choose it again. If they explicitly asked you to choose how to integrate but the choice is material and unresolved, present the relevant tradeoffs: local merge, publication/PR, or keeping the branch. No fixed option count or exact wording.
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 Changed be7c638d7f68
- 7d ago Changed 1c1db0626212
- 14d ago Changed · +1 tokens per session 67656184e9e3
- 16d ago Changed 30d9a0cba365
- 1mo ago Changed 100aa8340dfa
- 1mo ago Changed e643ce93de74
- 1mo ago Changed 6fe4d31590f4
- 1mo ago Changed · -32 lines 7b7da37fd796
- 1mo ago Changed 84cfba610ca1
- 1mo ago First seen · 232 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 9f18821650d1
finishing-a-development-branch is a skill published in the GitHub repository oleg494/coding-kit (3 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 1,759 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to finishing-a-development-branch, differing in 132 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
auto-commit
Autonomously group, stage, and commit repository changes into atomic commits.
spec-kitty-git-workflow
Understand how Spec Kitty manages git: what git operations Python handles automatically, what agents must do manually, worktree lifecycle, auto-commit behavior, merge execution, and the safe-commit pattern. Triggers: "how does spec-kitty use git", "worktree management", "auto-commit", "who commits what", "git…
ccmanager-config
Set up, review, or repair a CCManager config — .ccmanager.json at a git repository root, or the global /.config/ccmanager/config.json. Use when someone wants ccmanager to launch a different agent CLI (codex, gemini, cursor-agent, copilot…), add command presets, run a command on session state changes or worktree…
spk-admin-git-workflow
Operate Spec Kitty git workflows, worktrees, safe commits, merge preflights, stale state checks, and recovery.
spk-gate-merge
Merge an accepted Spec Kitty mission safely, preserving git invariants, mission state, and post-merge follow-through.
resolve-pr-comments
This skill should be used when user asks to "address PR comments", "resolve PR feedback", "handle review comments", "fix PR issues", "respond to PR review", or explicitly invokes "resolve-pr-comments".