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/stchiotis/library-first-engineering/lfe-buildernpx skills add StChiotis/Library-First-Engineering --skill lfe-buildergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/StChiotis/Library-First-EngineeringWhat 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 | $0.00034 | $0.01723 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00861 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00345 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00172 |
Grade A, and why
lfe-builder 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 3d 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 — 102 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
LFE Builder
Mission
Execute the approved plan in .plans/active_plan.md into production-ready code. You are the "Maker" who adheres to strict engineering standards and logic sovereignty.
Sub-Pipeline (execute in this order)
/lfe-builder(this skill) → Implement the plan/lfe-tdd→ Red-green-refactor quality pass on what you just built → writes.plans/tdd_report.md
Toolbox
/lfe-tdd: Mandatory Step 2. Run after implementation to validate and refactor.
Hard Rules
- Plan Adherence: Implement only the features defined in the active plan.
- Logic Sovereignty: Core business/domain logic must be centralized in the designated "Engine" or core modules.
- No Magic Numbers: All configurable values must be extracted into constants files.
- Domain/Boundary Separation: Place stable domain logic in core modules (per Logic Sovereignty); keep volatile boundary code (I/O, UI, framework wiring, external integrations) in separate adapter layers. The project's
engineering-standards.mddefines what "core" and "boundary" mean for this project type. - File-Based Input: Read
active_plan.mdas the source of truth, not conversation context.
Workflow
-
Check plan-critique gate (machine-checkable, file-based): Before reading anything else, open
.plans/plan_critique.mdand parse its YAML frontmatter. The gate opens only when one of these is true:verdict: PASS(anybrain_confirmationvalue), orverdict: WARNANDbrain_confirmationis a non-null ISO-8601 timestamp.
Halt and refuse to write to
src/in any other case — including: file absent,verdict: BLOCK,verdict: WARNwithbrain_confirmation: null, or unparseable frontmatter. Infer nothing about Brain confirmation from the conversation; the typed frontmatter field is the only valid signal. If halting, tell the Brain: "Plan-critique gate is closed (reason: <missing file | verdict: BLOCK | WARN not confirmed in file>). Re-run /lfe-plan-critique or updatebrain_confirmationbefore /lfe-builder can proceed." -
Review: Read
.plans/active_plan.mdandengineering-standards.md, then resolve the re-entry mode in this order:- Rework re-entry (highest precedence) — if
.plans/rework_directive.mdexists and itsslice:matchesactive_plan.md'sslice:: the Brain rejected this slice at the finalization gate. Read the## Rework Directiveand re-implement the named defect in the slice's files — run Implement → Refactor → Mark Done normally (the rework path re-implements; unlike the diagnose path below, it does not skip Implement). This branch wins over anydiagnosis_report.mdpresent. The plan-critique gate (Step 1) keys onplan_critique.mdverdict, which holds across rework rounds, so the already-open gate stays open — no re-critique. - Diagnosis retry — else if
.plans/diagnosis_report.mdexists, check itsslice:field againstactive_plan.md'sslice:field:- Match → this is a legitimate retry path after a failed inspection.
/lfe-diagnosehas already applied the fix tosrc/and recorded the Root Cause and Fix Summary. Read those sections so you understand the post-diagnosis state, but leave the slice as/lfe-diagnosefixed it — skip Steps 3–4 (Implement/Refactor) and proceed directly to Step 5 (Mark Done) with a freshbuilder_done.mdwhose## Files Touchedreflects the diagnose-applied fix and whose## Notes for TDDflags the regression-test added by diagnose. - Mismatch → the diagnosis report is stale (e.g., from a previous slice whose cleanup didn't complete). Ignore it and proceed with implementation normally from Step 3. (Hygiene will flag the stale file as orphaned on its next sweep.)
- Match → this is a legitimate retry path after a failed inspection.
- Fresh implementation — else proceed normally from Step 3.
- Rework re-entry (highest precedence) — if
-
Implement: Use vertical slices (one test -> one implementation) to build the feature.
-
Refactor: Clean up the implementation once the tests pass, without changing behavior.
-
Mark Done: Before handing off to TDD, write
.plans/builder_done.mdso the implementation phase has a physical checkpoint for crash recovery (so a session that dies between coding and TDD resumes without re-implementing). Schema below. -
TDD Pass: Run
/lfe-tddfor the red-green-refactor quality pass. -
Automated Testing: Automatically run the full test suite after dev work to verify the new additions and catch regressions.
-
Handoff: Once code is written,
builder_done.mdexists, TDD pass complete, and all automated tests are passing, signal the transition to Inspector.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 102 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 4b82f0c1cbcb
lfe-builder is a skill published in the GitHub repository StChiotis/Library-First-Engineering (43 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,723 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
context-engineering
Manages agent context for effective AI-assisted development. Use when working on large codebases, when the agent seems to lack necessary context, when structuring CLAUDE.md or project guidance files, or when coordinating long multi-step development sessions.
GuoFanDirector_Skills
郭帆导演风格视听语言体系,涵盖分镜设计、场景气氛、预演动态等导演工作流知识.
embedded-captions
Add captions or subtitles to an existing single-subject talking-head video without editing the footage. Use for plain verbatim captions, cinematic captions embedded behind the subject, VFX captions, “炸/特效/酷炫字幕,” or a named identity from the 35-style catalog. Route by visual identity, not by backend engine. The quiet…
general-video
Author or edit a custom HyperFrames composition when no specialized workflow fits, or when BRIEF.md sets flow: companion. Use for longer or multi-scene pieces, brand and sizzle reels, montages, static loops, static title cards, footage remixes, and freeform builds. Use motion-graphics instead for a short unnarrated…
happiness-skill
当用户问「怎么才能更幸福/为什么得到了还不满足/怎么减少焦虑」时调用。 核心理念: 幸福是缺憾感清空的默认状态, 是可训练的技能; 欲望是与自己的契约(得到前不快乐), 同时只留一个重大欲望; 活在当下。 不适用于: 临床抑郁等需要专业治疗的场景(本书方法不能替代医疗)。 Triggers: 幸福/不快乐/欲望/焦虑/知足/活在当下/happiness/desire/anxiety.
docx-comment-reply
Reply to comments (批注) in Word .docx/.doc files: extract comment context, draft replies, write threaded replies back, and validate OOXML.