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 runxhq/runx --skill receipt-querygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/runxhq/runxWrote 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/runxhq/runx/receipt-query)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/runxhq/runx/receipt-query"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/runxhq/runx/receipt-query/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/runxhq/runx/receipt-query"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/runxhq/runx/receipt-query.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 | $0.00022 | $0.02051 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00820 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00410 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00205 |
Grade A, and why
receipt-query 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 3d 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 — 191 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Receipt Query
Collect the exact signed run evidence a reviewer needs, using explicit receipt ids or bounded filters. Native Runx owns receipt lookup and verification; this skill normalizes the query and returns a reusable evidence packet. It is read-only.
The question records the review purpose. It is not translated into hidden filters: amount thresholds, business totals, scope searches and arbitrary natural-language conditions are not implemented by this runner. Supply the supported filter fields, then pass the resulting evidence to the appropriate review skill.
What this skill does
receipt-query applies an explicit bounded query over receipt ids, principal, skill
ref, status, and time range, then returns the receipts that satisfy it as
id-keyed stubs (receipt_id, skill_ref, status, created_at, verification
status). Exact-id reads also return receipt_details from the native redacted
inspection projection: signed authority, decisions, acts, artifact references,
lineage, seal, and verification without execution bodies, credential material,
or local paths. When proof asks for it, the skill returns the native tree-verification
verdict and findings. A requested check is not a successful check: an unknown
or failed verdict stays unknown or failed. The deterministic summary reports
matched receipt count and verification status, not a synthesized business
answer. Zero matches return needs_more_evidence.
The default read runner invokes the native receipt.query service directly.
The service resolves the same receipt store and signature policy as Runx's CLI,
projects bounded history rows, resolves exact ids through the redacted detail
reader, and optionally verifies each matched receipt tree. There is no child
process, command-string construction, or package-local receipt parser. It is
the in-runtime way for an agent to inspect its own sealed receipts before a
gated action. The detail packet is curated in Rust and never returns execution
bodies, credential material, or local paths.
What ships with it
9 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.
- fixtures/composes-in-graph.yaml 178 B
- fixtures/ledger-answer-with-chain-proof.yaml 1.5 KB
- fixtures/ledger-needs-question.yaml 241 B
- fixtures/read-ledger-by-exact-id.yaml 1.8 KB
- fixtures/read-ledger-with-explicit-receipts.yaml 532 B
- fixtures/support/composed.graph 829 B
- receipt-query.mjs 9.8 KB runs code
- references/catalog.md 146 B
- run.yaml 9.5 KB
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 191 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A bb4edc5f7dde
receipt-query is a skill published in the GitHub repository runxhq/runx (103 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 2,051 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 2026-10-14.
Other skills, from other repositories
dd-synthesis
Synthesize findings from multiple specialist agents into a coherent investment recommendation. Use when combining reports from 9+ specialist agents into a single decision document.
dd-report-format
Standard output format for due diligence analysis reports. Use when producing your final analysis to ensure consistency across all specialist agents.
dd-risk-scoring
Calculate weighted risk scores from specialist agent reports. Use when synthesizing multiple due diligence reports into an overall investment risk assessment.
dd-sourcing
Document sources properly for due diligence reports. Use when citing any external data, ensuring full traceability and auditability of findings.
dd-verification
Verify claims in pitch decks and founder statements using multiple independent sources. Use when analyzing any claim about market size, traction, team background, or competitive positioning.
rule6-rights-gate
Hard Rule 6 pre-publication rights gate — check licensing/provenance AND likeness/voice consent over a generated or third-party media asset before publish/use, and emit the machine-readable gate record. Use at the S4 Verify step of content/image, content/video, content/audio-assets (or any asset headed for…