Continuous-Claude-v3 is a Claude Code development environment that preserves working context between sessions, coordinates specialized agents, and stores project knowledge through ledgers, handoffs, and analysis tools. It is for people using Claude Code on ongoing or complex software work. Its catalogue entries are the skills, agents, hooks, plugin, and setting that provide its workflows and orchestration.
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 parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3 --skill premortemgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3Wrote 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/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/premortem)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/premortem"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/premortem/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/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/premortem"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3/premortem.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk pass
- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 39 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 40 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00014 | $0.02961 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.01481 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00592 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00296 |
Grade A, and why
premortem 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 6d 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 — 452 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pre-Mortem
Identify failure modes before they occur by systematically questioning plans, designs, and implementations. Based on Gary Klein's technique, popularized by Shreyas Doshi (Stripe).
Usage
/premortem # Auto-detect context, choose depth
/premortem quick # Force quick analysis (plans, PRs)
/premortem deep # Force deep analysis (before implementation)
/premortem <file> # Analyze specific plan or code
Core Concept
"Imagine it's 3 months from now and this project has failed spectacularly. Why did it fail?"
Risk Categories (Shreyas Framework)
| Category | Symbol | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Tiger | [TIGER] |
Clear threat that will hurt us if not addressed |
| Paper Tiger | [PAPER] |
Looks threatening but probably fine |
| Elephant | [ELEPHANT] |
Thing nobody wants to talk about |
CRITICAL: Verify Before Flagging
Do NOT flag risks based on pattern-matching alone. Every potential tiger MUST go through verification.
The False Positive Problem
Common mistakes that create false tigers:
- Seeing a hardcoded path without checking for
if exists():fallback - Finding missing feature X without asking "is X in scope?"
- Flagging code at line N without reading lines N±20 for context
- Assuming error case isn't handled without tracing the code
Verification Checklist (REQUIRED)
Before flagging ANY tiger, verify:
potential_finding:
what: "Hardcoded path at line 42"
verification:
context_read: true # Did I read ±20 lines around the finding?
fallback_check: true # Is there try/except, if exists(), or else branch?
scope_check: true # Is this even in scope for this code?
dev_only_check: true # Is this in __main__, tests/, or dev-only code?
result: tiger | paper_tiger | false_alarm
If ANY verification check is "no" or "unknown", DO NOT flag as tiger.
Required Evidence Format
Every tiger MUST include:
tiger:
risk: "<description>"
location: "file.py:42"
severity: high|medium
# REQUIRED - what mitigation was checked and NOT found:
mitigation_checked: "No exists() check, no try/except, no fallback branch"
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 452 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A ee0f02aad104
premortem is a skill published in the GitHub repository parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3 (3,937 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 2,961 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
fizzy-workflow
Use for guided Fizzy.do workflows: "set up Fizzy", "configure Fizzy for this project", "sync my work to Fizzy", "review my Fizzy progress", "end of session cleanup". Provides step-by-step guidance for common operations.
make-skill
Use when creating, improving, comparing, evaluating, reviewing or packaging Agent Skills following the agentskills.io specification. Also use when deciding whether a skill is the right solution vs MCP servers, Claude Rules Files, CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md. Handles SKILL.md authoring, frontmatter optimization, description…
test-ts
Write, review, and run TypeScript/React tests for this Next.js 16 App Router project. Use whenever writing or modifying .test.ts or .test.tsx files, adding test coverage to components, hooks, Server Actions, or utilities, setting up Vitest configuration, or asked about testing strategy. Covers Vitest (the project's…
isolate-cli
Run a third-party CLI as a subprocess without leaking into it or leaving state on the host, and prove both. Use when a script or skill shells out to an external tool, when a run must leave no trace outside the repository, when private input (a diff, a prompt, a credential) must not reach the tool's session log, when a…
check-dependabot
Validate a Dependabot configuration against the published JSON Schema and audit its groups against the repository's real dependency manifests. Use when creating or rewriting .github/dependabot.yml, when adding or reorganising groups, ignore or exclude-patterns, when a dependency lands in the wrong grouped PR or keeps…
review-impl
Review implementation changes for a given task against architectural standards. Use when reviewing a PR, evaluating recently committed code, assessing whether implementation changes are correct and architecturally sound, or when asked to 'review my changes', 'check this implementation', 'review what I built', 'is this…