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 agentmods add skills/paultyng/skill-issue/evaluate-dependencynpx skills add paultyng/skill-issue --skill evaluate-dependencygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/paultyng/skill-issueWhat 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 | $0.00149 | $0.03081 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00075 | $0.01541 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00616 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00308 |
Grade A, and why
evaluate-dependency 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 2d 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 — 121 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Evaluate Dependency
Dual-purpose: upfront selection when adding a new dep, and review when a PR adds or bumps one. Same evaluation criteria either way, with per-language addenda for ecosystem-specific quirks.
When to use
| Mode | Triggers |
|---|---|
| Selection | Considering adding a dep, asks "should I use X", compares alternatives, before go get / npm install / pip install / cargo add |
| Review | PR diff touches a manifest, or review-security / review-code sees a new dep in scope |
Language-specific quirks (read first)
The canonical package coordinate usually has ecosystem-specific gotchas that override the general criteria. The wrong coordinate is the wrong dep, no matter how good the package is.
- Go: references/go.md. Semantic import versioning (
/v2,/v3paths),+incompatiblesmell,pkg.go.dev/vuln.go.dev,govulncheck. - Other ecosystems: not yet covered here. Run the general checklist and flag uncertainty about the canonical coordinate with
unsure:(perterse-output) rather than guessing.
Future addenda: npm (scoped vs unscoped, deprecated packages, ESM/CJS), Python (package vs distribution name, wheel/sdist, ABI compatibility), Rust (pre-1.0 churn, crate renames), Ruby (transitive native-extension hazards). Add when a real evaluation surfaces the need.
Evaluation criteria
Run through these. Cite specific data: no hand-waving, no I think.
-
License. Detect via the ecosystem's registry or the repo's
LICENSE/LICENSE.md/COPYING. Permissive (MIT, BSD, Apache-2.0, ISC, MPL-2.0) is generally fine. Copyleft (GPL, AGPL, LGPL) needs an explicit compatibility check against the user's project license. No license = no use. Note relicense history; relicenses are a red flag. -
Internal precedent. Before weighing external popularity, check whether the candidate (or an equivalent) is already used or wrapped internally. Sources, in order:
- Project-local hints:
CLAUDE.md,REVIEW.md,.claude/rules/, and the manifests of sibling services if mounted locally. - Internal code search if available: Sourcegraph (
mcp__sourcegraph__keyword_search/mcp__sourcegraph__list_repos),gh search codescoped to the user's orgs. - Internal package registry / module index if the project documents one.
- Project-local hints:
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 121 lines · 149 tokens per session scan A 387bcdca675e
evaluate-dependency is a skill published in the GitHub repository paultyng/skill-issue (9 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 149 tokens to every session and 3,081 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
promptscript
PromptScript language expert for reading, writing, modifying, and troubleshooting .prs files. Use when working with PromptScript syntax, creating or editing .prs files, adding blocks like @identity, @standards, @restrictions, @shortcuts, @skills, or @agents, configuring promptscript.yaml, resolving compilation errors…
thesis-control
Use when AI-assisted thesis edits risk claim drift, scope creep, loss of author control, or repeated revisions that fail to converge; provides spine cards, edit contracts, drift audits, revision escalation, and human gates.
helius-jupiter
Skill "helius-jupiter" from helius-labs/core-ai, covering helius x jupiter — build defi apps on solana, mcp router surface, prerequisites, 1. helius mcp server and 2. jupiter api key.
argument-governance
Build and audit the manuscript argument system: intent, gap-contribution alignment, hierarchical claims, evidence balance, limitations, and reviewer attack surfaces. Use when a paper, thesis chapter, review article, or rebuttal needs explicit intent registers, contribution chains, claim hierarchy, argument maps…
verify
Fact-check claims encountered during reading — dates, names, events, citations. Use when encountering historical facts or disputed claims.
map
Show or update the mapping between literature and thesis chapters — which sources support which arguments. Use for tracking coverage.