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 redhuntlabs/wizard --skill pressure-testing-a-spellgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/redhuntlabs/wizardWrote 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/redhuntlabs/wizard/pressure-testing-a-spell)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/redhuntlabs/wizard/pressure-testing-a-spell"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/redhuntlabs/wizard/pressure-testing-a-spell/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/redhuntlabs/wizard/pressure-testing-a-spell"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/redhuntlabs/wizard/pressure-testing-a-spell.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 | $0.00043 | $0.01073 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00429 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00215 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00107 |
Grade A, and why
pressure-testing-a-spell 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 — 125 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pressure Testing a Spell
What this does
Tests a discipline-kind spell against rationalization. The test runs each scenario twice: once without the skill loaded (baseline) and once with it loaded (with-skill). The skill is only PASS if the with-skill run holds the rule that the baseline run violated.
This is what makes a discipline skill different from a description: proof it changes behavior.
When to use
- Inside
building-a-discipline-spellStage 5 - Inside
refining-a-spellwhen a discipline skill changed - Anytime a user asks "does this rule actually work?"
What you bring (Inputs)
- The draft discipline SKILL.md
- The user's domain
- Optionally: the user's known-bad past examples (where the rule was violated)
What you get (Output)
A PASS / NEEDS-REFINEMENT verdict, plus the specific rationalizations that slipped through if any.
How it works (Steps)
This is a workflow.
Stages
Stage 1: Construct pressure scenarios
Read the draft's Excuses and counters table. Each row implies a pressure scenario:
If the excuse is "It's a small fact, I don't need to verify"... ...then the pressure scenario is a small-fact request.
Use building-a-discipline-spell/pressure-scenarios-template.md for the scenario format. Generate 3 scenarios spanning at least 3 of the 5 pressure dimensions (speed, triviality, authority, confidence, familiarity).
Stage 2: Dispatch tester in DISCIPLINE MODE
Dispatch agents/spell-tester.md with:
- The full draft text
- The 3 pressure scenarios
- The user's domain
- Mode: discipline (the tester reads
kind: disciplineand routes itself)
Stage 3: Read the comparison results
The tester returns:
- BASELINE pass results (without skill): which scenarios violated the rule, which rationalization was used
- WITH-SKILL pass results: which rationalizations the skill caught, which slipped through
Stage 4: Decide verdict
| Baseline result | With-skill result | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| All 3 violated | All 3 held | PASS |
| All 3 violated | 1-2 held | NEEDS-REFINEMENT (skill is partial) |
| All 3 violated | 0 held | NEEDS-REFINEMENT (skill not changing behavior) |
| 0-2 violated baseline | (any) | INVALID — scenarios weren't pressure-y enough; return to Stage 1 |
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 · 125 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A c51b4dc041d6
pressure-testing-a-spell is a skill published in the GitHub repository redhuntlabs/wizard (11 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 1,073 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
squid-triage-issue
Bug intake — localise the suspected code, capture a deterministic reproducer, and emit a groomed bug task with a regression-test acceptance criterion, ready for /squid-implement-task or the full pipeline.
squid-implement-task
Implement one task — or a whole list / an approved Tasks Plan — via the inner SWE↔Tester loop, committing each task on PASS. Use when one or more GROOMED tasks are ready to build. To plan a feature first use /squid-plan; for the full end-to-end pipeline use /squid-implement-night.
squid-testing-python
Write and evaluate effective Python tests using pytest. Use when writing tests, reviewing test code, debugging test failures, or improving test coverage.
implement-rfc
Implement one RFC: check its predecessors, present a plan for approval, write the code, then demonstrate every acceptance criterion.
test-strategy
Write TEST-STRATEGY.md, a test plan per RFC, before the tests are written.
ai-observability-promptfoo
Testing and evaluation framework for LLM prompts and applications -- promptfooconfig.yaml, assertions, model-graded evals, red teaming, CI/CD integration, custom providers, and comparative evaluation.