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 oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring --skill git-workflowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoringWrote 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/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/git-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/git-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/git-workflow/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/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/git-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/git-workflow.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 | $0.00041 | $0.00664 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00266 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00133 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
git-workflow 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 2mo 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 — 85 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Git Workflow for OSCAL Compliance Documents
Purpose
Provide version control and change tracking for OSCAL compliance documents using a two-branch strategy: baseline (<id>-initial) and review (<id>-review) branches.
Important: Opt-in Only
This workflow is NOT executed by default. Only use when user explicitly requests:
- "Use Git for version control"
- "Create a PR at the end"
- "I want to track changes with Git"
- Or similar explicit requests
Default behavior: Skip all Git operations unless specifically requested.
Default Workflow
Phase 1: Setup (After Markdown Deployment)
Create baseline branch to establish change tracking foundation:
git checkout -b "<id>-initial"
git add -A && git commit -m "<message>"
Purpose: Establish a baseline for tracking changes.
Phase 2: Review (After Editing Completion)
Create review branch and pull request for change review:
Note: Direct commits to <id>-initial are prohibited (protected branch)
git checkout <id>-initial
git checkout -b <id>-review
git add -A && git commit -m "<message>"
git push origin <id>-initial <id>-review
gh pr create --base <id>-initial --head <id>-review
Best Practice: Squash multiple commits into one before creating the PR.
Branch Naming Convention
<id>-initial: Baseline branch containing the initial state<id>-review: Review branch containing your changes
Replace <id> with a meaningful identifier for the compliance document or project (e.g., "nist-800-53-low", "fedramp-moderate").
Rules
- Never execute Git operations unless user explicitly requests
- Always confirm branch identifier
<id>with user before creating branches - Protect
<id>-initialbranch from direct commits - Use descriptive commit messages referencing control IDs when possible
- Squash commits before PR creation for clean history
When to Recommend This Workflow
Suggest this workflow when:
- User mentions formal change tracking or review processes
- Multiple people are collaborating on compliance documents
- User needs clear audit trail of changes
- Organization requires pull request reviews
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 85 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A ee804a997c1d
git-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring (5 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 664 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
create-pr
Creates a GitHub PR with a Linear-ticket-prefixed title and a decision-led, narrative description for Prisma 8. Use when the user wants to create a pull request, open a PR, or submit changes for review.
git-commit
Generate well-formatted git commit messages following conventional commit standards.
repo-sync
Manage automatic Git syncing on macOS with repo-sync. Use only when the user explicitly invokes /repo-sync.
engineer-bot-ops
A workflow for carrying an engineering task from scope through implementation and reviewable delivery. It works with a repository's branch, existing changes, rules, checks, and permissions while separating completed, unverified, and next-step work.
mcore-split-pr
Split a PR into multiple PRs to reduce the number of required CODEOWNERS reviewer groups.
contributing
How to contribute to evlog, covering commit and PR conventions, changesets, the Definition of Done, testing rules, and the authored skills that walk through building a new adapter, enricher, framework integration, or map rule. Load this for any question about contributing, opening a PR, or adding something to the…