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 redker56/auto-harness --skill generator-apply-fixesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/redker56/auto-harnessWrote 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/redker56/auto-harness/generator-apply-fixes)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/redker56/auto-harness/generator-apply-fixes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/redker56/auto-harness/generator-apply-fixes/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/redker56/auto-harness/generator-apply-fixes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/redker56/auto-harness/generator-apply-fixes.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 | $0.00036 | $0.00424 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00212 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00085 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
generator-apply-fixes 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 9d 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.
What it actually says
Generator Apply Fixes
This skill governs Generator fix mode.
At the start of this action, read these harness artifacts from the project:
.harness/status.md.harness/intake.md.harness/spec.md.harness/design-direction.mdwhen the named defects touch UX, layout, or interaction rules..harness/contracts/sprint-XX-contract.md.harness/contracts/sprint-XX-review.mdwhen it exists for the current sprint..harness/runtime.md.harness/qa/sprint-XX-qa-report.md.harness/qa/sprint-XX-retest.mdwhen the current fix cycle follows a failed retest..harness/qa/sprint-XX-fix-log.mdwhen revising the current sprint fix log.
Then inspect the current project implementation relevant to this action:
- Read the source files, routes, components, services, tests, and config touched by the named defects and the necessary regression surface around them.
- Use code and runtime evidence to scope fixes precisely instead of broad cleanup.
Then read these skill references:
references/protocols/file-ownership.mdreferences/templates/fix-log.mdreferences/templates/runtime-template.md
Follow these rules:
- Fix only defects named in the current QA or retest context unless a tightly related adjustment is required.
- Treat the current sprint review, when present, as implementation guidance and cautions that still apply during the fix cycle.
- Update the runtime contract when startup, access, or healthcheck behavior changed.
- Record the actual fixes in the sprint fix log.
- Keep the fix log tied to named defects, changed files, and any verification notes that matter for retest.
- Do not rewrite QA or retest artifacts yourself.
What ships with it
3 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 43 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A f34d556c1287
generator-apply-fixes is a skill published in the GitHub repository redker56/auto-harness (14 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 424 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
issue-analyze
GitHub Issue and PR review thread deep analysis with Codex blind verdict. Use when: analyzing issue root cause, classifying problems, investigation planning, triaging PR review comments for actionability. Not for: fixing bugs (use bug-fix), code exploration (use code-explore). Output: classified analysis + verdict…
feature-verify
Feature verification (READ-ONLY, P0-P5). Use when: verifying feature behavior after deployment, validating API responses, diagnosing production issues, post-deploy smoke test. Not for: modifying data (use feature-dev), code review (use codex-review-fast), writing tests (use codex-test-gen), security audit (use…
test-health
Holistic test coverage measurement. Use when: assessing test health, measuring coverage trends, quantitative + qualitative test audit. Not for: running tests (use verify), reviewing test sufficiency only (use codex-test-review), generating tests (use codex-test-gen). Output: multi-dimensional dashboard with coverage…
test-review
Test coverage review via Codex exec. Use when: reviewing test sufficiency, identifying coverage gaps, test quality audit. Not for: generating tests (use codex-test-gen), code review (use codex-code-review). Output: coverage analysis + gap report.
debug
Interactive debugging workflow with hypothesis-driven probe loop. Use when: unknown bugs, script errors, silent failures, troubleshooting. Not for: known bugs (use bug-fix), GitHub issue analysis (use issue-analyze), code understanding (use code-explore). Output: debug report with probe journal + root cause + fix.
post-dev-test
Post-development test completion. Use when: checking test coverage after feature-dev, writing missing integration/e2e tests. Not for: unit test generation (use codex-test-gen), test review (use test-review). Output: test files + coverage report.