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 serac-labs/serac --skill studio-source-controlgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/serac-labs/seracWrote 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/serac-labs/serac/studio-source-control)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/serac-labs/serac/studio-source-control"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serac-labs/serac/studio-source-control/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/serac-labs/serac/studio-source-control"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serac-labs/serac/studio-source-control.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 | $0.00059 | $0.01648 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00824 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00330 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00165 |
Grade A, and why
studio-source-control 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 today.
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 — 148 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Studio Source Control
A scoped application can be linked to a git repository, after which its records are committed and pushed
like code. snow_source_control drives that over /api/sn_source_control.
This is not the Fluent toolchain. The fluent-* skills are about building an app from a local SDK
project; this is the platform's own git integration, reached from inside the instance. Both end up in a
repository and they are different routes.
Before it works at all
Source Control fails in ways that look like tool bugs when any of these is missing. Check them first:
- The app is scoped. Global-scope artefacts cannot be linked.
sys_appwith a scope likex_company_module. - The app is linked to a repository. Done once, in Studio (
Source Control → Link to Source Control). Nothing here creates the link. - Credentials exist on the instance. A
sys_repo_credentialrecord holding the repo credential — a PAT for GitHub/GitLab, not a password. Pass its alias ascredentials_aliaswhen the remote needs auth. - The Source Control plugin is active and the instance can reach the remote outbound. On a restricted network that means a MID server, and the failure is a timeout rather than a 401.
Confirm the link before anything else:
await snow_query_table({ table: "sys_app", query: "scope=x_acme_ops",
fields: "sys_id,name,scope,sys_class_name" })
await snow_source_control({ action: "status", app_scope: "x_acme_ops" })
status on an unlinked app is the fastest way to find out you are not where you think you are.
Commit, then push — they are separate
The order is git's, not ServiceNow's, and the tool does not merge the two:
// 1. what changed in the working copy
await snow_source_control({ action: "status", app_scope: "x_acme_ops" })
// 2. commit it locally, with a message
await snow_source_control({ action: "commit", app_scope: "x_acme_ops",
commit_message: "fix: widen the assignment lookup" })
// 3. and only then send it to the remote
await snow_source_control({ action: "push", app_scope: "x_acme_ops", credentials_alias: "acme-github" })
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.
- today First seen · 148 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A 176dd13cb93b
studio-source-control is a skill published in the GitHub repository serac-labs/serac (78 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 1,648 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 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 2026-09-11.
Other skills, from other repositories
git-wrapup
Review verified mcp-reporter changes, prepare versioned changelog entries, create logical commits and an annotated local tag. No push or publish.
github-cli
Skill "github-cli" from juan294/cc-rpi, covering github cli, json field discovery, pr check interpretation, or watch existing checks to completion and release vs pr flags.
repo-delivery
Use when reviewed repository changes are explicitly authorized for staging, commit, push, branch integration, synchronization, cleanup, or ref proof; owns Git mutation and stops before pull-request creation.
git-wrapup
Land working-tree changes as logical commits — the work grouped by concern, topped by a release commit (version bump, changelog, regenerated artifacts) and an annotated tag. Verify, commit, tag. Stops at "committed and tagged locally" — no push, no publish. The release-and-publish skill picks up from here. Distilled…
git-workflow
Git workflow patterns including branching strategies, commit conventions, merge vs rebase, conflict resolution, and collaborative development best practices for teams of all sizes.
contextual-commit
Write contextual commits that capture intent, decisions, and constraints alongside code changes. Use when committing code, finishing a task, or when the user asks to commit. Extends Conventional Commits with structured action lines in the commit body that preserve WHY code was written, not just WHAT changed.