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 product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills --skill think-eisenhower-moscow-paretogit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-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/product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills/think-eisenhower-moscow-pareto)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills/think-eisenhower-moscow-pareto"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills/think-eisenhower-moscow-pareto/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/product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills/think-eisenhower-moscow-pareto"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills/think-eisenhower-moscow-pareto.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 | $0.00159 | $0.01815 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00079 | $0.00907 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00363 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00181 |
Grade A, and why
think-eisenhower-moscow-pareto 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 12d 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 — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Eisenhower / MoSCoW / Pareto
These are the three most widely taught lightweight prioritization presets: the Eisenhower urgent-important 2x2, MoSCoW four-bucket scope cutting, and the Pareto vital-few chart. They are famous, frequently requested, and weakly evidenced as decision tools. This skill runs whichever one was asked for honestly: it leads with the caveat, then produces that single preset with the discipline its bare template omits.
Before you run this: the evidence caveat
These three sit at tier P (practitioner heuristic, no controlled effectiveness evidence). They are not one method but a bundle of three different operations stapled together by the word "prioritization", and that heterogeneity is the central fact: Eisenhower is categorical triage by two canned axes, MoSCoW is ordinal bucketing against one implicit scale, Pareto is a descriptive concentration observation. None has a controlled or comparative study measuring it against an alternative on decision quality. The strong study quoted to make Eisenhower look evidence-backed, Zhu, Yang and Hsee (2018), measures the mere urgency effect - the bias the matrix targets - not the matrix as a remedy; borrowing that grade would be laundering a finding about the disease onto a claim about the cure. MoSCoW's best-documented failure is category inflation: anything not a "Must" rarely gets built, so users mark almost everything "Must" and the method stops where the hard ranking begins. Pareto's concentration is real but domain-dependent and usually not 80-20: Kim, Singh and Winer (2017) measured a ratio averaging about 0.73 across 22 packaged-goods categories. Never invent an effectiveness number, and never report a clean 80-20 split the data does not support.
When to Use
- The user asks for an Eisenhower matrix, a MoSCoW list, or a Pareto chart by name and you should run it honestly rather than refuse.
- A fast, cheap prioritization is genuinely wanted and the cost of getting it slightly wrong is low, and you will add the discipline the bare template lacks.
- As a quick jolt: Eisenhower when urgent noise is crowding out the important; MoSCoW when stakeholders need a shared word for "not this release"; Pareto when you want to check whether a minority of causes drives most of an effect before spreading effort evenly.
What ships with it
5 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.
- 12d ago First seen · 71 lines · 159 tokens per session scan A d49ea1491c63
think-eisenhower-moscow-pareto is a skill published in the GitHub repository product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills (15 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 159 tokens to every session and 1,815 once invoked, about $0.0008 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
ops-demo
CocoOps demo mode activator — populates .cocoplus/ops/demo/ with realistic mock data and sets cocoplus.toml [demo] enabled = true. Invoked via $ops demo.
acl-rule-analysis
Vendor-agnostic ACL and firewall rule analysis with shadowed rule detection, overly permissive rule identification, unused rule discovery, redundant rule flagging, and rule ordering optimization. Covers ACLs (Cisco/JunOS/EOS) and firewall policies (PAN-OS/FortiGate/CheckPoint).
add-analytics
Add Google Analytics 4 tracking to any project. Detects framework, adds tracking code, sets up events, and configures privacy settings.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…
agent-team-orchestration
Orchestrate multi-agent teams with defined roles, task lifecycles, handoff protocols, and review workflows. Use when: (1) Setting up a team of 2+ agents with different specializations, (2) Defining task routing and lifecycle (inbox → spec → build → review → done), (3) Creating handoff protocols between agents, (4)…
agent-bom-enforce
Enforce security policies on MCP tool calls and block dangerous operations at runtime. Use when: "block risky calls", "apply policy", "proxy", "runtime protection", "policy enforcement", "intercept MCP calls".