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 rse/ase --skill ase-arch-analyzegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rse/aseWrote 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/rse/ase/ase-arch-analyze)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rse/ase/ase-arch-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rse/ase/ase-arch-analyze/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/rse/ase/ase-arch-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rse/ase/ase-arch-analyze.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00017 | $0.05392 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.02157 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.01078 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00539 |
Grade A, and why
ase-arch-analyze scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 494 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
@${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-control.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-skill.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-getopt.md
$ARGUMENTS
<if condition="<ase-project-boxing/> is equal `black`">
The project source artifacts are classified as a *black box*, so
the user does *not* want the architecture inspected or its findings
surfaced. *Skip* the entire investigation and reporting: do *not*
invoke any `Agent` tool and do *not* read any source, only output
the following <template/> and then *SKIP* the remaining steps STEP 2
and STEP 3:
<template>
<ase-tpl-bullet-normal/> **ARCHITECTURE ANALYSIS**: *suppressed* (`project.boxing` is `black`)
</template>
</if>
Investigate the code from an *architectural* perspective. If the
code base is large, you *MUST* use the `Agent` tool (not inline
work) to create multiple sub-agents to split the investigation
task into appropriate chunks.
*Determine* the *target programming language* and the *declared
architecture style* (if any) - e.g., Layered, Hexagonal
(Ports & Adapters), Onion, Clean, CQRS, Microservices,
Event-Driven, Modular Monolith - from code, project documentation,
README files, or folder structure.
Investigate the following architecture quality aspects across
7 thematic blocks:
**Block 1 - Component Boundaries**:
- **SA01 COMPONENT-RESPONSIBILITY**: each component (module,
class, package) addresses exactly *one single concern* -
i.e., has exactly *one reason to change*.
- **SA02 COMPONENT-GRANULARITY**: components have *appropriate
size* - neither monolithic nor fragmented.
- **SA03 COMPONENT-HIERARCHY**: components placed at the *correct
level* of the component hierarchy (system / program / module /
class / function).
**Block 2 - Structural Organization**:
- **SA04 LAYERING**: *layers* (horizontal cuts) clearly
separated, named, and ranked; no upward dependencies.
- **SA05 SLICING**: *slices* (vertical cuts - e.g., feature
modules, bounded contexts) clearly separated and *cycle-free*.
- **SA06 DEPENDENCY-DIRECTION**: dependencies flow in exactly
*one direction*; no *circular dependencies*.
- **SA07 REFERENCE-ARCHITECTURE**: *declared-style conformance* -
the chosen architecture style (see STEP 1 intro for the
recognized style list) is applied *consistently* throughout
the codebase, without accidental mixing of styles.
**Block 3 - Architecture Principles**:
- **SA08 COUPLING**: *loose data coupling* between components -
no *concrete-type dependencies* where abstractions exist, no
shared data structures leaking across boundaries, communication
via defined ports / facades / DTOs. (Runtime coupling such as
races and shared mutable state is covered by SA17.)
- **SA09 COHESION**: *strong cohesion* within each component -
internal parts (functions, fields, methods) are *tightly
related*, *co-change*, and share data or behavior; scattered
helpers that merely coexist by accident are flagged.
- **SA10 EXTENSIBILITY**: components are *open for extension*
(plugins, SPIs, hooks) but *closed for modification*.
- **SA11 SEPARATION**: *cross-cutting concerns* (logging,
security, caching, transactions, tracing) isolated from
domain logic; trace context propagated across component
boundaries.
- **SA12 ENCAPSULATION**: unavoidable complexity *encapsulated*
behind a simple interface that *shields* its implementation
details.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 4d ago Changed · +2 lines dcfcb25e1baf
- 7d ago Changed 58b9aa6a4edc
- 1mo ago First seen · 492 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A f1693af677d0
ase-arch-analyze is a skill published in the GitHub repository rse/ase (60 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 5,392 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-comments
Execute a feature-level review-comments cycle — aggregate unaddressed PR comments across every Feature.Repos PR, address or dismiss each one, and emit the standard handoff.
speq-code-review
Code review tag taxonomy and findings format for the code-reviewer agent during /speq-implement. Not for general code review.
verify
Answer "is this shippable / done?" with evidence before a commit or PR — fires on "verify", "is this done", "ready to ship?", pre-commit or pre-PR. Part of the Agentsmith harness; runs the project's verify phases and never claims "passing" without showing the output (R5).
review-implementation-functionality-evidence
Implementation review Functionality/Evidence axis - audits plan satisfaction and verification evidence.
review-implementation-craft
Implementation review Craft axis - audits intrinsic code quality only.
review-implementation-cleanliness
Implementation review Cleanliness axis - audits change-set hygiene and pushability.