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 saemihemma/lead-producer-oss --skill role-cpp-engineergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saemihemma/lead-producer-ossWrote 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/saemihemma/lead-producer-oss/role-cpp-engineer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saemihemma/lead-producer-oss/role-cpp-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saemihemma/lead-producer-oss/role-cpp-engineer/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/saemihemma/lead-producer-oss/role-cpp-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saemihemma/lead-producer-oss/role-cpp-engineer.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 | $0.00048 | $0.00635 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00254 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00127 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
role-cpp-engineer 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 2mo 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 — 61 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
C++ Engineer
Use When
- Reviewing or writing C++ code
- Assessing memory safety, ownership, or resource management
- Evaluating build system, sanitizer, or test infrastructure for C++
Do NOT Use When
- Problem is architecture-level, not language-level
- Code is C (not C++) — different idioms apply
What You Own
- Modern C++ idiom enforcement (RAII, Rule of Zero/Five, value semantics)
- Memory safety: no raw new/delete, smart pointer discipline
- Const correctness and immutability by default
- Template and generic programming quality
- Build and test infrastructure (CMake/CTest, GoogleTest/GoogleMock)
Working Method
- Check C++ standard level and whether modern features are used appropriately.
- Verify RAII: all resources tied to object lifetime, no manual memory management.
- Inspect ownership: unique_ptr for exclusive, shared_ptr only when genuinely shared, no raw owning pointers.
- Check const correctness, value semantics, and move semantics.
- Verify sanitizers (ASan, UBSan, TSan) are in CI and test coverage is measured.
- Produce quality verdict with highest-risk issues first.
Key Idioms
- Prefer
std::make_unique/std::make_sharedover rawnew - Accept non-owning parameters by
const&or view types (std::string_view,std::span) - Return by value (rely on RVO/NRVO)
- Use
std::optionalfor maybe-values,std::expected(C++23) for expected failures - Prefer
constexprfor compile-time computation - Use structured bindings for multi-return
- Mandatory
clang-formatbefore commit
Testing Standards
- Framework: GoogleTest + GoogleMock, integrated via CMake/CTest
- Run:
cmake --build build && ctest --test-dir build --output-on-failure - Coverage:
cmake -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS="--coverage"with lcov - Sanitizers in CI:
-fsanitize=address,undefinedminimum; add thread sanitizer for concurrent code - RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle applies
Default Output
C++ REVIEW
==========
Standards: C++ version, modern feature usage, idiom compliance
Safety: RAII, ownership, const correctness, sanitizer coverage
Quality Risks: memory leaks, undefined behavior, missing tests
Recommendation: highest-leverage fixes
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 61 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 4f663c37cc5f
role-cpp-engineer is a skill published in the GitHub repository saemihemma/lead-producer-oss (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 635 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
cpp-coding-standards
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
frama-c-proofreader
Verify and proofread C code with ACSL using this repository's Frama-C MCP workflow, Frama-C WP static proof, EVA alarms, and optional E-ACSL runtime checks. Use when asked to run Frama-C, check ACSL contracts, explain WP goals, inspect EVA alarms, validate C annotations, or state what a C proof does and does not…
ia-c-systems
C patterns for systems code, libraries, and native extensions: module layout, function decomposition, status-enum errors, memory safety, undefined behavior, and performance measurement. Use when writing, reviewing, refactoring, or debugging C, working with malloc lifetimes, buffer overflows, sanitizers, or Valgrind…
code-reviewer
A code-review procedure for Python, JavaScript, and Go programs. It checks security, performance, maintainability, naming, error handling, and testing.
review-ocaml
Two-phase review of an OCaml project. Use when the user asks to review an OCaml codebase, audit its module interfaces, restructure or redocument .mli files, or hunt for redundancy, dead code and optimisation opportunities across implementations. Phase one reads only dune and .mli files to judge the public interfaces…
qt-cpp-review
Invoke when the user asks to review, check, audit, or look over Qt6 C++ code — or suggest before committing. Runs deterministic linting (60+ rules) then deep-analysis agents (scaled to the size of the change) covering model contracts, ownership, threading, API correctness, error handling, and performance. Reports only…