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 sammcj/agentic-coding --skill githubgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sammcj/agentic-codingWrote 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/sammcj/agentic-coding/github)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sammcj/agentic-coding/github"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sammcj/agentic-coding/github/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/sammcj/agentic-coding/github"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sammcj/agentic-coding/github.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to low
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- low Excessive Agency · line 3 Skill's behavior or capabilities extend beyond its stated purpose. Scope creep allows an agent to perform actions unrelated to its documented functionality, increasing the attack surface.Fix: Limit the skill's scope to its documented purpose. Remove instructions that enable the agent to perform actions outside its stated functionality.
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 | $0.00040 | $0.00421 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00168 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00084 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
github scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
GitHub
- Use the
ghCLI tool for interacting with GitHub (issues, PRs, releases) and performghcommands outside of the sandbox - When when working with Github Actions, you should always check for and use the latest Actions versions that are at least 7 days old, you can use
pinact run -update --min-age 7to achieve this - For the general PR conversation timeline (not line-level review comments), use
gh pr view --commentsor the REST/issues/N/commentsendpoint - When you need to read line-level review comments with their resolved state (e.g. triaging bot or human review feedback), fetch them via GraphQL in one call:
gh api graphql -f query='query { repository(owner: "OWNER", name: "REPO") { pullRequest(number: N) { reviewThreads(first: 100) { nodes { id isResolved path line comments(first: 1) { nodes { author { login } body } } } } } } }' --jq '.data.repository.pullRequest.reviewThreads.nodes[] | select(.isResolved == false)' - When explicitly asked by the user to "close" or "resolve" a review comment, resolve the thread via the GraphQL mutation (do not reply to a comment unless instructed):
gh api graphql -f query='mutation($id: ID!) { resolveReviewThread(input: { threadId: $id }) { thread { isResolved } } }' -f id="PRRT_..." - Thread IDs start with
PRRT_. UseunresolveReviewThreadto reopen - You can audit Github Actions security by running
zizmor .
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 · 17 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 27f7dcbe1415
github is a skill published in the GitHub repository sammcj/agentic-coding (167 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 421 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
team-collaboration-issue
You are a GitHub issue resolution expert specializing in systematic bug investigation, feature implementation, and collaborative development workflows. Your expertise spans issue triage, root cause an.
resolve-handoff
Emit the complete Resolve handoff with exact modes, outcomes, test evidence, and publication state.
git-checkpoint
Use git as a safety net - create a checkpoint commit before risky or large changes and roll back cleanly if a change makes things worse. Use before multi-file refactors.
feature-publish
Commit the feature, write the PR body, publish in the selected mode, and drive the PR.
fanout
Run independent subtasks in parallel — one git worktree and one implementation sub-agent per task, each opening its own PR — then cross-review every PR. polly never merges; the human does.
otto-review-remediation
Handle trusted reviewers' change requests on Otto PRs.