Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to opencue/cuecards. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/opencue/cuecards/main/.agents/skills/vc-predict/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/opencue/cuecardsWrote 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/opencue/cuecards/vc-predict)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/opencue/cuecards/vc-predict"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/opencue/cuecards/vc-predict.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00034 | $0.01020 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00510 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00204 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00102 |
Grade A, and why
vc:predict 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 3d 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
vc:predict — Multi-Persona Pre-Analysis
Five expert personas independently analyze a proposed change, then debate conflicts to produce a consensus verdict before a single line of code is written.
When to Use
- Before implementing a major or high-risk feature
- Before a significant refactor or architecture change
- Evaluating competing technical approaches
- Stress-testing assumptions in a proposed design
When NOT to Use
- Trivial or low-risk changes (use
debuggerfor bugs,generate-plan/plan-agentfor already-decided tasks) - Already-approved work with no open design questions
- Pure dependency upgrades with no API changes
The 5 Personas
| Persona | Focus | Core Questions |
|---|---|---|
| Architect | System design, scalability, coupling | Does this fit the architecture? Will it scale? What new coupling does it introduce? |
| Security | Attack surface, data protection, auth | What can be abused? Where is data exposed? Are auth boundaries respected? |
| Performance | Latency, memory, queries, bundle size | What is the latency impact? N+1 queries? Memory leaks? Bundle bloat? |
| UX | User experience, accessibility, error states | Is this intuitive? What does the error state look like? Accessible on mobile? |
| Devil's Advocate | Hidden assumptions, simpler alternatives | Why not do nothing? What is the simplest alternative? Which assumption could be wrong? |
Debate Protocol
- Read the proposed change/feature description from the argument
- Read relevant code if file paths are provided (grep for affected areas)
- Each persona analyzes independently — do not let personas influence each other during this phase
- Identify agreements — points where all (or 4+) personas align
- Identify conflicts — points where personas meaningfully disagree
- Weigh tradeoffs — for each conflict, evaluate which concern has higher impact
- Produce verdict — GO / CAUTION / STOP with actionable recommendations
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 120 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 9357ac21d141
vc:predict is a skill published in the GitHub repository opencue/cuecards (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,020 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
loongsuite-pilot-insight
A reporting workflow for turning LoongSuite Pilot and AI coding-agent logs into structured reports about events, teams, data quality, development efficiency, and AI use. It defines the meaning of the log fields and the measurements used in dashboards.
loongsuite-pilot-ops
Skill "loongsuite-pilot-ops" from alibaba/loongsuite-pilot, covering loongsuite-pilot-ops, quick start, todo: add quick start commands and usage.
atomic-visual-options
Planning-phase visual comparison aid. Renders 2-4 side-by-side variants per decision dimension as a single throwaway, self-contained HTML file and captures the user's pick as typed terminal codes (e.g. "A2 B3"). Auto-fires on phrases like "show me a few options", "mock up some variants", "let me see this side by…
atomic-wiki
Conversational wiki and capture-bucket routing. Fires when the user wants a place, space, or folder for notes, research, tickets, raw dumps, or knowledge capture — checks the block in /.claude/CLAUDE.md; if the cwd is under a registered realm, creates the folder as a bucket via atomic wiki bucket add rather than a…
atomic-review
Compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", or invokes /atomic-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.
atomic-tdd
Test-first discipline. Auto-triggers on "let's implement X", "add feature Y", "fix bug Z", "write a test for", "implement", "build out", and similar pre-code-change phrases. Iron rule: failing test exists before production code. Skip only for pure docs/config changes with an explicit "skipped because:" note. Explicit…