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-code-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-code-analyze)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rse/ase/ase-code-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rse/ase/ase-code-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-code-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rse/ase/ase-code-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 | $0.00030 | $0.03180 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.01272 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00636 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00318 |
Grade A, and why
ase-code-analyze scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 5d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 297 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
@${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-control.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-skill.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-getopt.md
$ARGUMENTS
-
Only output the following and then STOP the entire flow (do not perform any further steps):
-
The project source artifacts are classified as a black box, so the user does not want them inspected or their problems surfaced (an explicitly given severity floor lifts this skip). Skip the entire investigation and analysis: do not invoke any
Bash,Glob, orAgenttool and do not read any source, only output the following and then SKIP the remaining step STEP 3:First, use the following to give a hint on this step:
Dispatch the investigation to sub-agents via the
Agenttool so that no investigation details leak into the user-visible transcript. The sub-agents perform the silent reading and checking; only their final structured return values are consumed here.For this, first determine the analysis lens : set performance if is equal
true, set security if is equaltrue, and set logic otherwise.Then silently restrict the analysis to the changed files of the Git working copy. Set staged and unstaged if both and are equal
true, set staged if only is equaltrue, and set unstaged otherwise. Determine the repository root by running the commandgit rev-parse --show-toplevel(taken exactly as given) and capturing its output into . Then determine the changed files by running the corresponding commands (taken exactly as given), each listing one path relative to per line, and collect all listed paths, dropping duplicates:git -C "<repo-root/>" -c core.quotepath=off ls-files --others --exclude-standardSkip every listed path below the
.ase/directory (it carries ASE's own state) and every path which is not a source code file (e.g. a binary file), and prefix every remaining path with<repo-root/>/. If<getopt-arguments/>is not empty, keep only those files which lie within the source code referenced by it, expanding any directory or wildcard references with theGlobtool. Set to the resulting list of individual source code files, preserving order.
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.
- 5d ago Changed · +16 lines dc53190e531a
- 7d ago Changed 994577e799d4
- 11d ago Changed · -8 lines c01cec270208
- 13d ago Changed · +59 lines 76591eecdd67
- 1mo ago First seen · 230 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A fa85a74a40d0
ase-code-analyze is a skill published in the GitHub repository rse/ase (60 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 3,180 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.