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 saski/arnesto --skill hierarchy-of-engagementgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saski/arnestoWrote 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/saski/arnesto/hierarchy-of-engagement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saski/arnesto/hierarchy-of-engagement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saski/arnesto/hierarchy-of-engagement/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/saski/arnesto/hierarchy-of-engagement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saski/arnesto/hierarchy-of-engagement.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 | $0.00084 | $0.00519 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00208 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
hierarchy-of-engagement 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to hierarchy-of-engagement — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Domain Context
This skill implements a proven product management framework. The approach combines best practices from industry leaders and is designed for practical application in day-to-day PM work.
Input Requirements
- Context about your product, feature, or problem
- Relevant data, research, or constraints (recommended but optional)
- Clear articulation of what you're trying to achieve
Hierarchy of Engagement
What It Is
The Hierarchy of Engagement is a three-level framework for building consumer products that retain users and create defensibility. The core insight: retention comes from making the product better the more you use it, so users have more to lose by leaving.
Most consumer products fail not because they lack users, but because they lack retention. Getting someone to sign up is one thing; getting them to stay is everything. This framework provides a systematic approach to building products where engagement compounds over time.
The key shift: Move from asking "How do we get more users?" to asking "How do we make each user's experience improve the more they use us?"
When to Use It
Use the Hierarchy of Engagement when you need to:
- Define your North Star metric (what action matters most?)
- Improve retention in a consumer or social product
- Build product stickiness beyond features alone
- Create switching costs that protect against competitors
- Design your onboarding/activation flow
- Evaluate product-market fit through engagement quality
- Prioritize features that drive compounding value
When Not to Use It
Don't apply this framework when:
- Building B2B enterprise software (different retention dynamics)
- The product is transactional by nature (one-time purchase)
- There's no meaningful "use over time" pattern
- You're optimizing for viral acquisition before proving retention
Resources
Writing:
- The Hierarchy of Engagement by Sarah Tavel (Medium)
- The Hierarchy of Engagement, Expanded by Sarah Tavel
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 · 58 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A a98d56fd8e79
hierarchy-of-engagement is a skill published in the GitHub repository saski/arnesto (6 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Unlicense. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 519 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to hierarchy-of-engagement, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
work-state-and-delivery
Use when designing or reconciling design docs, task boards, external trackers, execution plans, delivery records, handoffs, review evidence, task-to-change traceability, or repository commit-coupling policy.
requirements-writer
Use when converting PM intake into a slice SPEC.md with observable acceptance outcomes, explicit scope, and advisory sibling build dependencies.
queue-handoff
Use when ending a turn, finishing a slice, blocked on another agent's work, or escalating to a human — durable work handoff via queue items so the system keeps moving across compactions, missed messages, and interruptions. Covers the hot-potato terminal-turn-rule (active work ends by passing the ball, not by going…
mcore-split-pr
Split a PR into multiple PRs to reduce the number of required CODEOWNERS reviewer groups.
document-to-action-items
Extract cited facts, obligations, deadlines and proposed tasks from contracts, reports, forms and scans, keeping page citations, how binding each item is (may/should/must) and unclear scan text visible.
issue-triage
Sort a backlog of issues and pull requests: label each by type and severity, link duplicates, try the bug reports, ask for the one missing detail, and turn the accepted ones into ready-to-work briefs.