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/radiantlogicinc/fastworkflow/validate-command-parametersnpx skills add radiantlogicinc/fastworkflow --skill validate-command-parametersgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/radiantlogicinc/fastworkflowWhat 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 | $0.00133 | $0.01496 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00067 | $0.00748 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00299 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00150 |
Grade A, and why
validate-command-parameters 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 — 166 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Validating extracted parameters
Pydantic answers one field at a time: right type, matches the pattern, was supplied. It cannot answer
the questions that only exist once the whole call is on the table — is this end date before its own
start date, is anything actually selected for this bulk command to operate on, does this decision
value exist in the backend's vocabulary. validate_extracted_parameters is where those go.
The contract
A static method on the command's Signature class:
class Signature:
class Input(BaseModel):
...
@staticmethod
def validate_extracted_parameters(
workflow: fastworkflow.Workflow,
command: str,
cmd_parameters: "Signature.Input",
) -> tuple[bool, str]:
...
return (True, '')
Return (True, '') to proceed, or (False, message) to send message back to the caller. The hook
is optional — a command without it simply skips this stage.
Where it runs in the order
The framework validates in this sequence, and stops at the first failure:
1. type coercion per field str/int/float/bool/Enum/list, plus any `pattern`
2. missing required fields sentinel values count as missing; empty list counts as missing
3. db_lookup per field fuzzy resolution against a live key set
4. validate_extracted_parameters <- only reached if 1-3 all passed
So this hook may assume every field is present and of the declared type. Do not re-check types, required-ness or regex here — declare those on the field and let stage 1 do it. What is left is exactly what the field declarations cannot express.
It is a correction hook, not just a check
The cmd_parameters object it receives is the one the command body will read, so writing to it is
the intended way to normalise:
@staticmethod
def validate_extracted_parameters(workflow, command, cmd_parameters):
if not cmd_parameters.order_id.startswith('#'):
cmd_parameters.order_id = f'#{cmd_parameters.order_id}'
return (True, '')
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 · 166 lines · 133 tokens per session scan A 4e0cb26684db
validate-command-parameters is a skill published in the GitHub repository radiantlogicinc/fastworkflow (52 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 133 tokens to every session and 1,496 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
agent-host-chat-contributions
Build and review cross-cutting agent-host chat behavior through lifecycle contributions. Use when adding turn lifecycle side effects, prompt or context injection, restored-history transformation, protocol-action observation, or when reviewing changes that add code to AgentSideEffects or AgentService.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.