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 | $0.00028 | $0.00542 |
| Sonnet 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 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.
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.
- 9d 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 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 1,084 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 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.
crit
Review code changes, a plan, a live page (running dev server), or a local HTML file with Crit inline comments and structured human feedback. Use only when the user explicitly invokes /crit or directly asks to use Crit; a generic review request does not count.
code-review
Review frontend code for best practices, bugs, and improvements. Use when reviewing PRs, checking code quality, or before committing.
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.
simplify
Code simplification for high-complexity files. Targets deep nesting, copy-paste patterns, and god functions.
grill
Rigorous requirements gathering through Socratic questioning. Use when the user says "/grill", "grill me", "ask me questions until we understand", or wants to be interrogated about implementation details before writing code. Forces deep thinking about edge cases, behavior, and design decisions before any code is…