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 rockyflux/yq-workflow --skill auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rockyflux/yq-workflowWrote 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/rockyflux/yq-workflow/audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rockyflux/yq-workflow/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rockyflux/yq-workflow/audit/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/rockyflux/yq-workflow/audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rockyflux/yq-workflow/audit.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 | $0.00054 | $0.01919 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00768 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00384 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00192 |
Grade A, and why
audit 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.
This is a copy
97% identical to audit — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 148 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MANDATORY PREPARATION
Invoke /frontend-design — it contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the Context Gathering Protocol. Follow the protocol before proceeding — if no design context exists yet, you MUST run /teach-impeccable first.
Run systematic technical quality checks and generate a comprehensive report. Don't fix issues — document them for other commands to address.
This is a code-level audit, not a design critique. Check what's measurable and verifiable in the implementation.
Diagnostic Scan
Run comprehensive checks across 5 dimensions. Score each dimension 0-4 using the criteria below.
1. Accessibility (A11y)
Check for:
- Contrast issues: Text contrast ratios < 4.5:1 (or 7:1 for AAA)
- Missing ARIA: Interactive elements without proper roles, labels, or states
- Keyboard navigation: Missing focus indicators, illogical tab order, keyboard traps
- Semantic HTML: Improper heading hierarchy, missing landmarks, divs instead of buttons
- Alt text: Missing or poor image descriptions
- Form issues: Inputs without labels, poor error messaging, missing required indicators
Score 0-4: 0=Inaccessible (fails WCAG A), 1=Major gaps (few ARIA labels, no keyboard nav), 2=Partial (some a11y effort, significant gaps), 3=Good (WCAG AA mostly met, minor gaps), 4=Excellent (WCAG AA fully met, approaches AAA)
2. Performance
Check for:
- Layout thrashing: Reading/writing layout properties in loops
- Expensive animations: Animating layout properties (width, height, top, left) instead of transform/opacity
- Missing optimization: Images without lazy loading, unoptimized assets, missing will-change
- Bundle size: Unnecessary imports, unused dependencies
- Render performance: Unnecessary re-renders, missing memoization
Score 0-4: 0=Severe issues (layout thrash, unoptimized everything), 1=Major problems (no lazy loading, expensive animations), 2=Partial (some optimization, gaps remain), 3=Good (mostly optimized, minor improvements possible), 4=Excellent (fast, lean, well-optimized)
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 · 148 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A 3b258cc6a2c6
audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository rockyflux/yq-workflow (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 1,919 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to audit, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
critique-theater
Five-dimension design quality review — score the artifact against craft, brand, accessibility, and copy, then fix what falls short before handing it over.
design-review
Five-dimension design audit (frontend UI/UX · server data-model & flow · endpoint spec · daemon-runtime/SDK & local-cache-first · built-in skill/agent-role), executed by a NON-implementing agent. Every dimension gets a verdict; N/A only with a stated reason. A dimension the design silently skipped must be surfaced as…
cinematic-shot
Shoot software UI like a film. A sequence of hero shots, each a steep, oblique, extreme close-up of the interface floating in black, with a razor-thin focal plane, a slow motivated camera drift, and UI that acts on its own, hard-cut on the action, ending on one line of copy and a still logo. Use when asked for a…
compare-screenshots
Compare screenshots against the intended design, distinguishing approved references from historical baselines. Use for iterative implementation matching, before/after visual review, objective image telemetry, or checking a lone capture for flat, empty, or badly framed content.
design-with-images
Explore UI and visual design with image generation, then iterate the real implementation against the user-selected concept. Use when brainstorming visual directions, offering mockup variants, or implementing an approved generated design; do not stop at the mockups or the first code approximation.
preview-shots
Open image shots (screenshots, snapshot baselines, montages, renders) in ONE macOS Preview window so the user can eyeball them. Use when the user asks to open / show / pull up / review shots in Preview or Finder, or right after producing visual artifacts the user should look at before signing off.