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 oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill boundariesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenixWrote 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/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/boundaries)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/boundaries"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/boundaries/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/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/boundaries"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/boundaries.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 | $0.00033 | $0.01156 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00578 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00116 |
Grade A, and why
boundaries 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.
Copies of this mod
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- phx-boundaries — 91% identical, 25 lines differ
- elixir-phoenix-boundaries — 88% identical, 29 lines differ
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.
Phoenix Context Boundary Validation
Analyze module dependencies to ensure clean context separation and proper architectural boundaries.
Usage
/phx:boundaries # Check for violations
/phx:boundaries --assess # Score context health (0-100)
/phx:boundaries --fix # Suggest fixes for violations
--assess Mode: Context Health Score
Evaluate overall boundary health with a quantified score.
Metrics Calculated
| Metric | Healthy Range | Red Flag | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Modules per context | 3-15 | >20 or <2 | 20% |
| Public API surface | 5-30 funcs | >40 funcs | 15% |
| Fan-out (contexts called) | 1-4 | >6 | 20% |
| Fan-in (called by contexts) | 1-6 | >10 | 15% |
| Circular dependencies | 0 | >0 | 15% |
| Boundary violations | 0 | >0 | 15% |
Commands for Assessment
Use Glob to count .ex files per context directory under lib/my_app/*/.
Use Grep to count public function definitions per context file under lib/my_app/*.ex.
Run mix xref graph --format stats for dependency analysis.
Run mix xref graph --format cycles --label compile for compile-time circular dependencies.
Output Format
## Context Health Assessment
### Overall Score: 82/100 (Good)
| Context | Modules | API | Fan-Out | Fan-In | Score |
|---------|---------|-----|---------|--------|-------|
| Accounts | 5 | 12 | 2 | 4 | 95 |
| Orders | 18 | 45 | 8 | 3 | 62 |
| Shared | 2 | 8 | 0 | 12 | 78 |
### Issues Found
1. **Orders** - Too large (18 modules, 45 funcs)
- Consider: Extract Fulfillment, Invoicing sub-contexts
2. **Orders** - High fan-out (8 contexts)
- Consider: Review if all dependencies necessary
### Recommendations
- Split Orders into Orders + Fulfillment
- Review Accounts ← Billing dependency
Iron Laws - Never Violate These
- Controllers call only contexts - No direct Repo access from web layer
- Schemas are pure data - No side effects, no Repo calls in schema modules
- Contexts own their schemas - Don't import schemas from other contexts
- Explicit dependencies only - Cross-context calls must be intentional
- DO NOT refactor context boundaries without running
mix xreffirst — Refactoring without dependency data creates new violations; always map the dependency graph before moving modules
What ships with it
2 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.
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 · 33 tokens per session scan A 119492dbf094
boundaries is a skill published in the GitHub repository oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix (541 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,156 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
elderly-ui-audit
A code review for making websites and mobile apps easier for older people to use, based on Chinese government accessibility guidelines.
fable-super-audit
Comprehensive, rubric-driven, whole-repository code audit that ends in a prioritized improvement plan with an executive health grade. Built to run in a premium, time-limited model session (Fable): it dispatches cheaper Opus/Sonnet subagents to explore the codebase and pre-build a project-tailored audit checklist, then…
cc-codex-review
A second-opinion workflow that sends uncertain questions and important technical decisions to Codex for review alongside Claude Code.
skill-pr-review
Comprehensive code review for pull requests using parallel multi-agent analysis. Audits CLAUDE.md compliance, checks for bugs, analyzes git history, reviews comments, and filters by confidence score. Use when reviewing a GitHub PR, mentions "code review", "review this PR", or "/code-review".
improve-codebase-architecture
Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.
odoo-code-review
Use when reviewing Odoo code — yours before commit, Claude's after generation, or a teammate's PSDU PR. Catches shape-of-bad-code issues that lint won't, plus customer-readiness gaps. Invoke before claiming Odoo work is done.