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/rchase999/aidd/execution-charternpx skills add rchase999/aidd --skill execution-chartergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rchase999/aiddWhat 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 | $0.00057 | $0.01595 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00797 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00319 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00160 |
Grade A, and why
execution-charter 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Building under contract
The gate has passed. .aidd/02-research/decisions.md now outranks your defaults.
Read it properly
Read the whole file, including the machine-readable block. Then restate it back to the user before writing code — every APPLY, INFER, INNOVATE, and DEFERRED. Misreading the contract is the cheapest mistake to catch here and the most expensive one to catch later.
The four stances
APPLY — build exactly this. No latitude on the choice. If it turns out to be unworkable, stop and report; do not substitute. The user took this decision away from you deliberately.
INFER — read it, extract what's useful, then decide independently. The most misread stance: it does not mean "use it", it means "learn from it". If your implementation is indistinguishable from the referenced option, you inferred nothing. Say what you took and what you left.
INNOVATE — the named option marks ground already covered. Go elsewhere. Not a variation with different names; a genuinely different approach. State in the charter what you're doing instead and why it beats what was shown. If after real effort the shown option is simply correct, say that explicitly rather than pretending you invented something.
DEFERRED — your call. Pick what the research supports, record the pick and the reason, tag it [claude-call] so it is trivially findable later.
LOCKED — not a choice at all: a fact about the codebase, with the file that proves it. Build with it. Replacing it is a separate project and needs the user's explicit say-so. A user note on a locked segment ("fine for now, but I want this gone next quarter") is a constraint on how you build — design so the replacement is possible later — not permission to do it now.
On an existing codebase
The contract's What the existing codebase already fixes section is binding, and its must not break list outranks everything else in the document. Breaking the revenue path is worse than shipping nothing.
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 · 120 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A bf23e6f59a02
execution-charter is a skill published in the GitHub repository rchase999/aidd (2 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,595 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
agent-code-analyzer
Agent skill for code-analyzer - invoke with $agent-code-analyzer.
agent-collective-intelligence-coordinator
Agent skill for collective-intelligence-coordinator - invoke with $agent-collective-intelligence-coordinator.
agent-payments
Agent skill for payments - invoke with $agent-payments.
agui-dotnet-cross-language-tests
Author cross-language interop tests that verify the AG-UI .NET SDK is wire-compatible with the TypeScript SDK — a Vitest TS client driving a C# CrossLanguage.TestServer over HTTP, both directions, including protobuf byte-parity against @ag-ui/proto. USE FOR: adding or modifying cross-language interop coverage…
agui-dotnet-streaming-chat
Get started with the AG-UI .NET SDK: bootstrap and run your first streaming-chat app (client + server) with the AG-UI .NET NuGet packages (AGUI.Client, AGUI.Server, AGUI.Formatting, AGUI.Abstractions). USE FOR: which packages to install and how to wire them; constructing an AGUIChatClient against an endpoint and…
agui-dotnet-sample-step
Add a GettingStarted sample Step (a Server/Client pair) to the AG-UI .NET SDK that demonstrates one protocol feature the way we want users to write it. USE FOR: adding a new samples/GettingStarted/StepNN Server+Client pair, wiring it into AGUI.slnx and the integration-test project, giving it a deterministic…