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 OpenHands/extensions --skill migration-scoringgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OpenHands/extensionsWrote 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/openhands/extensions/migration-scoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/openhands/extensions/migration-scoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openhands/extensions/migration-scoring/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/openhands/extensions/migration-scoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openhands/extensions/migration-scoring.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 | $0.00024 | $0.00857 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00343 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00171 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00086 |
Grade A, and why
migration-scoring 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 1mo 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 — 138 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Comprehensive quality evaluation for code migration projects.
Overview
This plugin evaluates completed migrations through multiple lenses:
- Mapping — Document source-to-target file relationships
- Quality Scoring — Measure coverage and correctness
- Style Scoring — Evaluate code quality and conventions
- Reporting — Generate executive summary with recommendations
Prerequisites
- Completed migration with both source and target code present
- Python 3.13 with
uv - LLM API key (Anthropic or OpenAI)
- Optional: Custom style rubric file
Quick Start
export LLM_API_KEY="your-api-key"
export LLM_MODEL="anthropic/claude-3-5-sonnet-20241022"
uv run python -m lc_sdk_examples.migration_scoring \
--src-path /path/to/migration/project \
--rubric-path /path/to/style_rubric.txt
PowerShell equivalent for the environment setup:
$env:LLM_API_KEY = "your-api-key"
$env:LLM_MODEL = "anthropic/claude-3-5-sonnet-20241022"
uv run python -m lc_sdk_examples.migration_scoring `
--src-path C:\path\to\migration\project `
--rubric-path C:\path\to\style_rubric.txt
Workflow Phases
Phase 1: Migration Mapping
See ../migration-mapping/SKILL.md
Creates a source→target file mapping:
- Identifies which target files implement each source file
- Supports many-to-many relationships
- Flags unmigrated source files
Output: migration_mapping.json
{
"CALC001.cbl": ["InvoiceCalculator.java", "TaxCalculator.java"],
"CUST002.cbl": ["CustomerService.java"]
}
Phase 2: Quality Scoring
Scores each source file on:
- Coverage (1-5): How much functionality was migrated
- Correctness (1-5): How accurately behavior was preserved
Output: migration_score.json
{
"CALC001.cbl": {
"coverage": 4,
"correctness": 5,
"justification": "All calculation logic migrated..."
}
}
Phase 3: Style Scoring
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 138 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 46764ec6b66b
migration-scoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository OpenHands/extensions (167 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 857 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
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…