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 technical-writinggit 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/technical-writing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/openhands/extensions/technical-writing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openhands/extensions/technical-writing/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/technical-writing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openhands/extensions/technical-writing.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 | $0.00047 | $0.00993 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00397 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00099 |
Grade A, and why
technical-writing 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 — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Technical Writing
Write the way a sharp senior engineer speaks in chat: direct, conversational, and confident. Favor flowing technical prose over report language, slide-deck fragments, or documentation boilerplate.
Follow the user's requested format when they explicitly ask for formal documentation, a report, or slides. Otherwise, apply these rules to technical explanations, design feedback, architecture discussion, issue and pull-request replies, and recommendations.
Lead with the answer
Open with the verdict and its central caveat in one or two plain sentences. Do not use a bold heading as a substitute for the answer.
Match the length to the question and err short:
- A yes/no or confirmation question usually needs 2 to 4 sentences.
- A choice between alternatives usually needs a few paragraphs.
- A genuinely multi-part design question may need a longer structured answer.
Before sending, remove any paragraph that does not change what the reader understands, decides, or does next. Cut unrequested background, restatements of the problem, and generic advice the reader already knows.
Complete the argument
Every paragraph and every bullet should carry a complete argument: claim, mechanism, and consequence together. Do not leave the reader to infer why a fact matters.
Weak:
MoR increases scan cost, latency, and metadata overhead.
Better:
MoR is cheap to write, but every read has to reconcile delete files against data files, so scans get slower and less reliable until something compacts them - and now that compaction is part of the system you operate.
Match the form to the content
Vary the structure because different kinds of content need different forms:
- Use short bold headings on their own line for distinct sections or comparison axes, such as cost versus operations.
- Use a numbered list for a genuine sequence, diagnostic procedure, or ranked set of hypotheses. Start each item with a short bold lead and continue in full sentences.
- Use plain bullets for parallel, enumerable facts.
- Use paragraphs for reasoning, causality, and narrative.
What ships with it
4 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 107 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A ddd627776d70
technical-writing is a skill published in the GitHub repository OpenHands/extensions (167 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 993 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-03.
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…