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 agentmods add skills/sgaunet/claude-plugins/run-lintnpx skills add sgaunet/claude-plugins --skill run-lintgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sgaunet/claude-pluginsWrote 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/sgaunet/claude-plugins/run-lint)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sgaunet/claude-plugins/run-lint"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sgaunet/claude-plugins/run-lint.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00041 | $0.00628 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00314 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00126 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00063 |
Grade A, and why
run-lint 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 6d 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
Run Lint Skill
Auto-detect the project's linter from build files and run it. Returns pass/fail status with output.
Detection Logic
Probe for build/config files using first match wins -- but a config file existing does not mean the target inside it exists. Verify the named target before running it; when it is absent, fall through to the next matching row rather than reporting a failure.
| Trigger | Verify the target exists | Command | Fallback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Taskfile.yml | task --list-all | grep -qE '^\* lint:' |
task lint |
fall through to next row |
| Makefile | make -n lint >/dev/null 2>&1 |
make lint |
fall through to next row |
| go.mod | n/a | golangci-lint run ./... |
go vet ./... |
| package.json | --if-present handles it |
npm run lint --if-present |
npx eslint . |
| pyproject.toml / setup.py | n/a | ruff check . |
python -m flake8 . |
| Cargo.toml | n/a | cargo clippy -- -D warnings |
-- |
| None detected | n/a | Warn: "No linter detected" and skip | -- |
A missing target is not a lint failure. task lint where no lint task is
defined, or npm run lint with no lint script, exits non-zero for a reason that
has nothing to do with the code. Treat it as "this row does not apply" and
continue detection; npm run lint --if-present exits 0 silently when the script
is absent, so chain its fallback rather than reading the exit code as success.
Execution
- Detect the linter using the table above, verifying the target exists before running it
- Run the detected command
- On success: report "Lint passed"
- On failure: display errors, attempt auto-fix if supported (
--fixflag for the tool), re-run once - Return final status (pass/fail) and output
Working Directory
If a working_directory context is provided (e.g., a worktree path), run all commands prefixed with cd <working_directory> &&. Otherwise, use the current directory.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 46 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 3d57732bff42
run-lint is a skill published in the GitHub repository sgaunet/claude-plugins (16 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 628 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-pr
Review a Pull Request in one of two postures: an expository "tour guide" that walks through changes in logical order, or an adversarial audit that assumes the change is wrong until proven safe and hunts for the failure mode. Triggers: "review PR #123", "adversarial review", "walk me through this PR", "PR tour guide"…
intended-vs-implemented
The method for finding the gap between what a system is supposed to do and what the code actually does — the class of bug generic scanners miss because they have no model of intent. Defines what counts as documented intent, what counts as implementation evidence, which mismatches matter, and how to avoid hand-wavy…
team-review
Review changed code for reuse, quality, and efficiency using a team of persistent named reviewers. This skill should be used when the user says "team review", "review with team", or wants parallel code review with persistent team members for follow-up questions. Similar to /subagent-review but reviewers persist after…
roslyn-query
Query .NET/C# codebases using Roslyn AST analysis via dotnet run file. Use for tracing data flow, auditing API usage, finding pattern violations, or ad-hoc codebase queries.
review-responder
Use when receiving feedback on code you implemented, responding to reviewer comments, deciding which review suggestions to implement, or pushing back on incorrect review feedback.
meta-review
Audits any SKILL.md in this repo against SKILL-SPEC.md, the skill authoring standard — checks frontmatter, the seven required sections, tier-appropriate sections, and quality-gate structure, then returns a scored checklist with prioritized fixes. Trigger on: "review this skill", "audit this SKILL.md", "does this skill…