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 ralfyishere/rules-with-receipts --skill structured-reasoninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ralfyishere/rules-with-receiptsWrote 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/ralfyishere/rules-with-receipts/structured-reasoning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ralfyishere/rules-with-receipts/structured-reasoning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ralfyishere/rules-with-receipts/structured-reasoning.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00107 | $0.01532 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.00766 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00306 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00153 |
Grade A, and why
Structured Reasoning 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 8d 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 — 85 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Structured Reasoning
Purpose
Hard questions answered with unstructured intuition produce confident mush — conclusions that feel reasoned but can't show their work. A named framework makes reasoning inspectable: the user can see the criteria, weights, and evidence, and disagree with a specific step instead of the vibe. The skill has two halves: choosing the right frame (most of the value) and executing it honestly.
When to use this skill
- Choosing between options: tools, architectures, strategies, candidates, plans.
- Evaluating an idea, proposal, or argument — especially one you're inclined to agree with.
- Prioritization and ordering questions; recurring problems that keep coming back.
- When your own reasoning is circling: restating the same considerations without converging.
When NOT to use this skill
- Questions with verifiable answers — go verify (
live-state-truth), don't deliberate. - Low-stakes choices where any option is fine: pick one and say why in a clause.
- Don't stack frameworks for show. One frame, well executed, beats three decorative ones. Two is the practical maximum (e.g., evidence grading feeding a decision matrix).
Operating procedure
Step 1 — Classify the question, pick the frame:
| Framework | Use when | Output looks like |
|---|---|---|
| First principles | Inherited assumptions are suspect; novel problem; "we've always done it this way" | The problem rebuilt from known constraints upward; assumptions confirmed or discarded |
| Tradeoff analysis | 2–3 viable options differing along different dimensions | Per-option: what you gain, what you pay, when it wins |
| Decision matrix | 3+ options × 3+ criteria; transparency matters; a group must align | Weighted criteria table with scores and the reasoning behind each score |
| Root-cause analysis (5 whys / causal chain) | A problem recurs despite fixes; symptom vs. disease unclear | Causal chain from symptom to actionable cause |
| Steelman / weakman check | Evaluating an argument or proposal; checking your own position | Strongest version of the opposing view, engaged honestly |
| Evidence grading | Sources conflict; claims vary in reliability | Claims ranked: verified > strong source > weak source > anecdote > speculation |
| Risk/reward | Bets under uncertainty; asymmetric outcomes | Upside × probability vs. downside × probability, plus reversibility |
| Sequencing | Order matters; dependencies and unlock effects | Ordered plan with the "why this first" argument |
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 85 lines · 107 tokens per session scan A 88c532bc4195
Structured Reasoning is a skill published in the GitHub repository ralfyishere/rules-with-receipts (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 107 tokens to every session and 1,532 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
happiness-skill
A Chinese-language guide to happiness based on reducing unmet wants, focusing on the present, and treating happiness as a trainable skill.
setup-matt-pocock-skills
A setup skill that configures engineering skills for a repository, including its issue tracker, labels, and documentation layout. A repository is the project folder managed by version control.
frontend-design
A design guide for building polished web interfaces such as pages, dashboards, forms, navigation, and reusable UI components. It covers HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and common frontend frameworks.
alterlab-cobrapy
Build and analyze genome-scale constraint-based metabolic models with COBRApy — flux balance analysis (FBA), flux variability analysis (FVA), gene and reaction knockouts, flux sampling, and SBML model I/O. Use when simulating metabolic networks, predicting growth or knockout phenotypes, or running systems-biology and…
alterlab-depmap
Query the Cancer Dependency Map (DepMap) for cancer cell line gene dependency scores (CRISPR Chronos), drug sensitivity data, and gene effect profiles. Use when identifying cancer-specific genetic vulnerabilities, finding synthetic lethal interactions, checking whether a gene is essential in given cell lines, or…
alterlab-qutip
Simulates open quantum systems with QuTiP, the Quantum Toolbox in Python, solving Lindblad master equations (mesolve), Monte Carlo trajectories (mcsolve), and unitary dynamics (sesolve). Use when studying master-equation or Lindblad dynamics, decoherence, dissipation, quantum optics, cavity QED, or open-system time…