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 PracticalSwan/agent-skills --skill finishing-a-development-branchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/PracticalSwan/agent-skillsWrote 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/practicalswan/agent-skills/finishing-a-development-branch)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/practicalswan/agent-skills/finishing-a-development-branch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/practicalswan/agent-skills/finishing-a-development-branch/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/practicalswan/agent-skills/finishing-a-development-branch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/practicalswan/agent-skills/finishing-a-development-branch.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to high
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 →
- high Tool Misuse · line 118 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- high Prompt Injection · line 229 Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
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 | $0.00020 | $0.02464 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.01232 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00493 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00246 |
Grade A, and why
finishing-a-development-branch scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 3d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 276 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Finishing a Development Branch
Overview
Core principle: Verify tests → Detect environment → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.
Announce at start: "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."
Step 1: Verify Tests
Run the project's full test suite (npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...).
If tests fail, report the failures and stop — the menu comes after a green suite:
Tests failing (<N> failures). Must fix before completing:
[Show failures]
If tests pass: continue to Step 2.
Step 2: Detect Environment
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
# Capture now, while still inside the workspace — Step 5 changes directory
# before cleanup (Step 6) needs this value
WORKTREE_PATH=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
This determines which menu to show and how cleanup works:
| State | Menu | Cleanup |
|---|---|---|
GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON (normal repo) |
Standard 3 options | No worktree to clean up |
GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON, named branch |
Standard 3 options | Provenance-based (see Step 6) |
GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON, detached HEAD |
Reduced 2 options (no merge) | Externally managed — leave in place |
Step 3: Determine Base Branch
The base branch is whatever this work forked from — usually named in the plan, the conversation, or the branch's upstream. If it is not already known, ask: "This branch split from - is that correct?" Confirm before merging: merging into the wrong base is expensive to undo.
Step 4: Present Options
Normal repo and named-branch worktree — present exactly these 3 options:
Implementation complete. What would you like to do?
1. Merge back to <base-branch> locally
2. Push and create a Pull Request
3. Keep the branch as-is (I'll handle it later)
Which option?
Detached HEAD — present exactly these 2 options:
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.
- 3d ago Changed · +2 lines 0c515d7d2421
- 4d ago Changed 0dc186c9607d
- 7d ago First seen · 274 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 35299ab52888
finishing-a-development-branch is a skill published in the GitHub repository PracticalSwan/agent-skills (14 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 2,464 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
codew-release-qa-sweep
Use before claiming Codewhale release work is done: run the full gate sweep and list the manual QA targets.
verify-and-ship
Run all quality checks (tests, lint, typecheck), fix failures, update the changelog, commit, push, and create/update the pull request or merge request.
development-workflow
Detailed development workflow with modular patterns for git, review, testing, and deployment.
ship-workflow
Automated release pipeline: merges main, runs tests, pre-landing review, version bump, changelog, bisectable commits, and PR creation. Triggers on: "ship it", "release this", "prepare for release", "open a PR", "push and PR", "land this", "/ship-workflow".
AI Release Guardian
Analyze a git diff, map affected risks, select the tests that matter, detect coverage gaps on changed lines, run configurable quality gates, and produce a go/no-go release report with cited evidence. Recommends only; never merges or deploys.
mathodology-dev-test-release
Use when checking skill metadata, references or repository boundaries, or preparing an explicitly requested skills release.