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 ronronner02/codepilot-agent --skill spec-compound-refreshgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ronronner02/codepilot-agentWrote 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/ronronner02/codepilot-agent/spec-compound-refresh)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ronronner02/codepilot-agent/spec-compound-refresh"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ronronner02/codepilot-agent/spec-compound-refresh/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/ronronner02/codepilot-agent/spec-compound-refresh"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ronronner02/codepilot-agent/spec-compound-refresh.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 | $0.00050 | $0.12115 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.04846 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.02423 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.01212 |
Grade A, and why
spec-compound-refresh 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 — 708 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Compound Refresh
Maintain the quality of docs/solutions/ over time. This workflow reviews existing learnings against the current codebase, then refreshes any derived pattern docs that depend on them.
Workflow Contract Summary
- 输入：
docs/solutions/、CONCEPTS.md、可选 scope hint，以及当前 source/test/doc evidence。 - 输出： Keep/Update/Consolidate/Replace/Delete/Stale 分类、已应用的知识维护变更和完整 Applied/Recommended 报告。
- 硬出口： source truth、目标 repo、写入范围或语义分类无法确认时不得把猜测写成 current knowledge；headless 只能把歧义标 stale。
- 权威： 当前代码与验证证据优先于旧 learning；本地 mutation、commit 和 landing 分别需要独立授权，
mode:headless只改变交互方式。 - 消费者： 项目维护者，以及读取
docs/solutions//CONCEPTS.md的规划、实现、调试和审查 workflow。
Mode Detection
Check whether the invocation arguments supplied by the current host contain the exact token mode:headless. If present, strip only that token (preserving the remainder, quoted paths, and token order as the scope hint) and run in headless mode.
| Mode | When | Behavior |
|---|---|---|
| Interactive (default) | User is present and can answer questions | Ask for decisions on ambiguous cases, confirm actions |
| Headless | mode:headless in arguments |
No user interaction. Apply all unambiguous actions (Keep, Update, Consolidate, auto-Delete, Replace with sufficient evidence). Mark ambiguous cases as stale. Generate a summary report at the end. |
Resolve mutation and landing authority
Record three independent run-local facts before any write or Git action:
mutation_authorization: authorized | missing
commit_authorization: authorized | missing
landing_authorization: authorized | missing
A direct request to refresh or maintain docs/solutions/ authorizes only the bounded local document mutations described by this workflow. Set commit_authorization only when the current user or visible upstream handoff separately requests a commit. Set landing_authorization only when push or PR creation/update is separately explicit. mode:headless, a feature branch, writable permissions, successful edits, or a clean tree do not grant commit, branch creation, push, or PR authority. Without commit authorization, preserve verified edits as uncommitted work; without landing authorization, do not push or open a PR.
What ships with it
8 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.
- assets/resolution-template.md 2.8 KB
- references/concepts-vocabulary.md 6.2 KB
- references/per-action-flows.md 11 KB
- references/schema.yaml 8.4 KB
- references/yaml-schema.md 7.6 KB
- scripts/run-python.sh 774 B runs code
- scripts/validate-doc-claims.py 14 KB runs code
- scripts/validate-frontmatter.py 12 KB runs code
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 · 708 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A 4424b53322b0
spec-compound-refresh is a skill published in the GitHub repository ronronner02/codepilot-agent (0 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 12,115 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
trace
Use when encountering bugs, test failures, runtime errors, broken builds, or "this doesn't work" reports. Systematic root-cause analysis before any patch — never blind-patches symptoms. Standalone, ends with a final-integration review of the fix. Trigger with /hyperflow:trace, "debug this", "find the root cause", "why…
issue
Use when starting a chain from a GitHub issue — turning an issue URL or number into a triaged, planned, dispatched, and reviewed pull request. Classifies the thread (bug → root-cause discipline, feature → plan chain, question → drafted reply), synthesizes a spec from the issue's own acceptance criteria, then runs the…
anti-patterns
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that greatcto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident).
skeptical-triage
Reusable 3-round self-challenge + arbiter pattern for filtering false positives from findings/verdicts. Use when the cost of a false-positive gate block exceeds the cost of 4 extra LLM turns.
code-coherence-review
Reviews code and plans for logic coherence, correctness, and structural integrity.
review-all
Multi-agent code review for diffs (project-agnostic). Covers standards, bugs, security, DRY, smells, perf, tests, API contracts, a11y/i18n. Verifies each finding to eliminate false positives. Use for /review-all, pre-PR/pre-commit review, or auditing uncommitted/staged changes.