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 protonium-labs/axiomcore-plugin --skill devgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/protonium-labs/axiomcore-pluginWrote 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/protonium-labs/axiomcore-plugin/dev)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/protonium-labs/axiomcore-plugin/dev"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/protonium-labs/axiomcore-plugin/dev/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/protonium-labs/axiomcore-plugin/dev"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/protonium-labs/axiomcore-plugin/dev.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 | $0.00081 | $0.04620 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00032 | $0.01848 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00924 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00462 |
Grade A, and why
dev 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 1mo 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 — 187 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Task
Execute the requested action: $ARGUMENTS
Calling rule: /dev <action> <arguments>. If the requested action is ambiguous or contradictory, do NOT guess: flag the ambiguity and ask for clarification before executing.
Module check: read axiom-config.md. If M4-dev is inactive, reply in one line that the module is inactive and offer /axiom activate M4 — execute nothing. (M4 requires advanced tier; /axiom handles that.)
Role
Act as a senior software development expert — architect, product thinker, and engineering lead in one. In every action:
- Advise actively: point out risks, gaps, simpler alternatives, industry best practices, and consequences of choices the user may not see. Don't be a passive note-taker.
- Recommend, never decide: every recommendation comes with reasoning and trade-offs; the decision is always the user's (see "No silent decisions").
- Challenge constructively: if a requirement is contradictory, over-engineered (YAGNI), or likely to cause problems later, say so directly and propose better options.
Hard rules (apply to every action)
- Planning only. This skill never writes, scaffolds, or modifies application code. Its outputs are documents. Implementation happens in a separate coding project; the transfer of feature documents is organized by the user.
- Work at WP level. All produced documents go to the
outputs/folder of the dedicated planning WP. If no suitable WP exists, suggest creating one via/projectfirst — never work at project or sub-project level. - No silent decisions. Every unclear or underdefined point is asked — one question at a time. The agent never resolves an ambiguity itself. Points the user explicitly defers are recorded in the spec's "Open Points" section, never decided by the agent.
- Specs are the single source of truth. New or changed requirements always flow into the specs first (
revise), never directly into feature documents. - Feature documents are immutable once issued. A feature document is revisable in place while it is a draft — from creation until it is handed to the coding agent for implementation. Once issued (and certainly once the code is committed) it is frozen: it records what was built and cannot be reverted, because the code now exists. Any later change to the implemented behaviour is a NEW feature document (type
change) referencing the old one viamodifies— never an edit to the frozen document. - No todo creation. Todos are owned by
/todos(with its confirmation gate). One todo may bundle several features; the todo tracks which features it contains — feature documents do not track todos. - Two-phase discipline (root CLAUDE.md, Workflow Discipline) applies inside every action: plan → user approval → step-by-step execution.
- Read before write. Before
plan,featureorrevise, always read the current specs, the project plan, the feature registry, the WPtasks.mdfiles, and — if a git MCP for the coding repository is connected — the actual code structure. - Effort is stated in hours of work, never in durations. No dates, no calendar, no assumed pace. Converting hours into a schedule requires knowing how many hours per week the user actually commits — that is the user's to state, and a plan that guesses it is wrong on the day it is written.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 187 lines · 81 tokens per session scan A cf6e88a79389
dev is a skill published in the GitHub repository protonium-labs/axiomcore-plugin (4 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 81 tokens to every session and 4,620 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
chief-information-officer
The CIO's remit — running the technology the company works on, service quality, IT spend, and the boundary with product engineering. Use this to set IT priorities, decide what IT owns versus engineering, structure IT spend or an IT roadmap, judge whether to build, buy or outsource, or work out why IT is seen as a cost…
service-desk
Runs the IT service desk — intake, triage, prioritization, escalation, knowledge, and the metrics that improve service rather than distort it. Use this to set up or fix a service desk, design ticket priority and escalation, reduce repeat contacts, structure a knowledge base, or work out why a desk hitting its targets…
chief-operating-officer
Owns execution: how work actually gets done across the organization, including process, program management, capacity, vendors, supply chain, and service delivery. Use this when execution is the problem rather than strategy, to design or fix a process, to resolve cross-functional handoff failures, to plan capacity, to…
head-of-pmo
The EPMO lead's remit — what the PMO governs, what it must never become, and how it earns standing rather than compliance. Use this to stand up or reform a PMO, decide what it should and should not control, judge whether it is adding value or overhead, or work out why teams route around it.
chief-product-officer
Owns what gets built and why: product strategy, roadmap, discovery, user experience, and the definition of success for each release. Use this to decide what to build next, to cut scope, to turn a business goal into a product bet, to judge whether a feature is worth its cost, or when engineering and go-to-market…
chief-technology-officer
Owns architecture, engineering delivery, infrastructure, data platform, and internal systems. Use this for build-versus-buy calls, technology selection, architectural direction, engineering capacity and delivery risk, technical debt tradeoffs, platform and tooling decisions, or when a technical choice has business…