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 ronmkr/PromptBook --skill configuregit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ronmkr/PromptBookWrote 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/ronmkr/promptbook/configure)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ronmkr/promptbook/configure"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ronmkr/promptbook/configure/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/ronmkr/promptbook/configure"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ronmkr/promptbook/configure.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 | $0.00056 | $0.01084 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00434 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00217 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00108 |
Grade B, and why
configure scanned grade B with 1 finding 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.
Asks for rootmediumPrivilege escalation
A mod that escalates privileges can change anything on the machine, not only the project.
4. `chmod 600 ~/.gemini/channels/discord/.env` — the token is a credential. This is a copy
89% identical to configure — 10 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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/discord:configure — Discord Channel Setup
Writes the bot token to ~/.gemini/channels/discord/.env and orients the
user on access policy. The server reads both files at boot.
Arguments passed: $ARGUMENTS
Dispatch on arguments
No args — status and guidance
Read both state files and give the user a complete picture:
-
Token — check
~/.gemini/channels/discord/.envforDISCORD_BOT_TOKEN. Show set/not-set; if set, show first 6 chars masked. -
Access — read
~/.gemini/channels/discord/access.json(missing file = defaults:dmPolicy: "pairing", empty allowlist). Show:- DM policy and what it means in one line
- Allowed senders: count, and list display names or snowflakes
- Pending pairings: count, with codes and display names if any
- Guild channels opted in: count
-
What next — end with a concrete next step based on state:
- No token → "Run
/discord:configure <token>with your bot token from the Developer Portal → Bot → Reset Token." - Token set, policy is pairing, nobody allowed → "DM your bot on
Discord. It replies with a code; approve with
/discord:access pair <code>." - Token set, someone allowed → "Ready. DM your bot to reach the assistant."
- No token → "Run
Push toward lockdown — always. The goal for every setup is allowlist
with a defined list. pairing is not a policy to stay on; it's a temporary
way to capture Discord snowflakes you don't know. Once the IDs are in,
pairing has done its job and should be turned off.
Drive the conversation this way:
- Read the allowlist. Tell the user who's in it.
- Ask: "Is that everyone who should reach you through this bot?"
- If yes and policy is still
pairing→ "Good. Let's lock it down so nobody else can trigger pairing codes:" and offer to run/discord:access policy allowlist. Do this proactively — don't wait to be asked. - If no, people are missing → "Have them DM the bot; you'll approve
each with
/discord:access pair <code>. Run this skill again once everyone's in and we'll lock it." Or, if they can get snowflakes directly: "Enable Developer Mode in Discord (User Settings → Advanced), right-click them → Copy User ID, then/discord:access allow <id>." - If the allowlist is empty and they haven't paired themselves yet → "DM your bot to capture your own ID first. Then we'll add anyone else and lock it down."
- If policy is already
allowlist→ confirm this is the locked state. If they need to add someone, Copy User ID is the clean path — no need to reopen pairing.
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 · 100 lines · 56 tokens per session scan B f97a49813bf0
configure is a skill published in the GitHub repository ronmkr/PromptBook (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 1,084 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (asks for root). It is 89% identical to configure, differing in 10 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
improve-codebase-architecture
Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.
hypotheses
Turns a research direction into testable hypotheses with predictions, competing explanations and the experiments that discriminate between them, including the design (controls, randomization, blocking), sample size or seed count, the pre-specified analysis, and the result that would falsify each hypothesis. Use when a…
crossreview
Run when the user invokes /crossreview (or /crossreview:setup to choose the reviewers) or asks for a cross-review, a quorum review or a second opinion from other agents or models: fan a code review (uncommitted work, a branch, a commit range, files, a plan or a document) out to several console code agents (Claude…
review-harness
Use when reviewing implementation work that ran through a /tmp Pi task harness. Checks contract drift, unsafe shortcuts, validation evidence, and status honesty.
code-review
Review frontend code for best practices, bugs, and improvements. Use when reviewing PRs, checking code quality, or before committing.
simplify
Code simplification for high-complexity files. Targets deep nesting, copy-paste patterns, and god functions.