Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add shalintripathi/organic-os/plugin install organic-osWrote 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/shalintripathi/organic-os/onsite-propose)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/shalintripathi/organic-os/onsite-propose"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shalintripathi/organic-os/onsite-propose/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/shalintripathi/organic-os/onsite-propose"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shalintripathi/organic-os/onsite-propose.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 | $0.00033 | $0.01187 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00593 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00237 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
onsite-propose scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Propose on-page changes (creates gated items; applies nothing)
- Input: audit findings, a signal reference, or a user request naming URLs.
- For each change, draft the exact after-state: new title (<= 60 chars),
new meta description (<= 155 chars), canonical, focus keyword, schema
JSON-LD payload, or a content edit (quote the exact before/after text).
2b. Decision check, BEFORE any
create_itemcall. For every target, search the brain's decision memory:PYTHONPATH="$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/lib" python3 -c "..."snippet importingcore.decisions-search(<brain>, [<page path>, <focus keyword>, <what the fix does>]). It returns prior decisions newest first withdate,choice,scope,item, and therationale. A hit whosechoiceisrejectedmeans a human already refused this work. Exactly two paths are allowed, never a third:- SKIP it, and say so in the run report: name the page, the decision date, and the recorded reason.
- Or CREATE it with a line in the proposal body reading "previously
rejected on because ; proposing again because ". What changed must be a concrete new fact - a new signal, a
ranking move, a competitor or site change - never "worth another
look".
Silently re-creating a rejected proposal is forbidden. A hit with any
other
choiceis context to quote in the body, not a blocker.
- One proposal item per page:
create_item(kind="onpage-fix", target=<url>, body=<before/after table + rationale + expected effect + falsifiability>).create_itemis the ONLY birth path - items are bornproposedwith an empty approvals list; never write aproposals/file directly or set any other status at creation. - Rebuild queue (
create_itembirths items; the rebuild is what puts them inapprovals/queue.md). Notify per the profile approval channel with ONE call:PYTHONPATH="$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/lib" python3 -c "..."importingcore.approvaland callingnotify_pending(<brain>, send), wheresendis a callable taking(path, item)and delivering over the channel chosen below. It sends every un-notified proposed item and marks each as it goes. An item is marked notified ONLY after its send returns without raising, so a failed send is retried on the next run rather than lost, and re-runs never re-notify. Do not callis_notifiedormark_notifiedby hand. Channel selection:- in-session: present now with AskUserQuestion (approve/reject each)
- telegram: send via core.telegram
send_item(token from env file), then poll withcore.approval.process_telegram_decisionson the next run to collect replies (offset persisted automatically) - pr-merge: commit the proposal file on a branch, open a PR (gh pr create)
- slack/email: post/send a summary via the available connector; approval
happens in-session or by channel reply read at the next run
4b. Image and alt-text fixes (action type: image-fix). Audit findings
from the images checks - a missing or empty alt (skills/onsite-audit
step 2), an imageless 500+ word explainer (step 3.3) - become one
onpage-fixproposal per page whose body declaresaction: image-fixand carries one line per image: - Missing alt text: the image's src and media id (from the CMS
adapter's
get_media), the current alt (empty), and the proposed alt text. Ground the proposed alt in the surrounding content: describe what the image shows for someone who cannot see it, in one sentence. Never keyword-stuffed - alt text is accessibility text first, and a keyword appears only when the image is genuinely about it. - Missing in-content image: reference the ce-image brief path
(skills/ce-image writes
<slug>-image-brief.md) as the creation route, and name where in the post the image belongs. Creation happens through that brief, outside the apply path: apply only places a file that already exists (see the image-fix section in skills/onsite-apply), so the proposal must be executable once the asset exists, and honest about waiting until it does. Same gate as every proposal: born proposed viacreate_item, approved by a human, executed by onsite-apply.
- Record any in-session decisions immediately via the contract CLI:
PYTHONPATH="$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/lib" python3 -m core approve <item-path> --actor <user> --channel in-session(orreject, with--notefor any reason given). Never edit brain frontmatter directly. The contract CLI is the only write path for status and approvals.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 77 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 93b6c9c46d84
onsite-propose is a skill published in the GitHub repository shalintripathi/organic-os (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,187 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
seo-vertical-detect
Classify a website as ecommerce, local-business, blog-publisher, saas, docs, or generic (multiple may apply), and report detected locales, from the persisted PageSnapshot plus the platform detector's vertical hints. Used by seo-orchestrator to decide which conditional modules to run and how to reweight the scores.
seo-fix-apply
Writer protocol preloaded into the seo-fixer-writer agent — how confirmed SEO/AI-search fixes are applied (git pre-flight, backup, Edit/Write for local diffs, ticketed adapter CLIs for remote targets, re-verify, publish only on a second ticket, rollback) and the findings-array output contract. Used only by the fix…
audit
Audit a website or web codebase for SEO and AI-search (GEO/AEO) — produces two independent 0-100 scores (Search SEO + AI Visibility) plus a prioritized, evidence-backed report persisted on disk. Read-only; never writes to the project. Use when the user asks to audit, analyze, check, or score a site's SEO, structured…
ai-visibility
Fast-path AI visibility — get a brand's 0–100 Akii Visibility Score (computed by an open-source LLM judge against the brand's public footprint) with four-dimension breakdown AND a per-engine proxy map for ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, and Google AI Overviews based on FirstPageSage signal weights.…
seo-audit
Single audit entry point — surface-level scorecard or deep infrastructure dive depending on the requested mode. Default full mode produces a multi-layer scorecard across all 9 areas (crawlability, indexation, meta tags, headings, images, Core Web Vitals, JS rendering, mobile + security, structured data, internal…
optimize-page
Comprehensive single-page optimization across all three layers — traditional SEO (title / meta / H1 / internal links), AEO (chunk quality, direct-answer leads, FAQ extraction), and GEO rewrites using the tactics published by the Princeton/IIT Delhi GEO study (citation integration, expert quotes, statistics enrichment…