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 stefan-stepzero/shipkit --skill shipkit-thinking-partnergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/stefan-stepzero/shipkitWrote 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/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-thinking-partner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-thinking-partner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-thinking-partner/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/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-thinking-partner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-thinking-partner.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 | $0.00054 | $0.03406 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.01362 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00681 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00341 |
Grade A, and why
shipkit-thinking-partner 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 329 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
shipkit-thinking-partner - Cognitive Thinking Partner
Purpose: Facilitate structured thinking through decisions, trade-offs, and unknowns using cognitive frameworks. Forces genuine dialogue by restricting tool access — Claude becomes a thinking partner, not a doer.
Key innovation: The tool restriction IS the feature. No Write, Edit, or Bash access means Claude cannot jump to implementation. Discussion summary stays in conversation; persistence is delegated to other skills.
When to Invoke
User triggers:
- "Help me think through..."
- "Think with me about..."
- "Let's discuss..."
- "What am I missing?"
- "Devil's advocate this"
- "Pre-mortem this decision"
- "I'm torn between..."
- "What are the trade-offs?"
- "Challenge my thinking"
Adversarial-mode triggers (route to the autonomous debate, not the interactive flow):
- "Debate this"
- "Stress test this decision"
- "Adversarial analysis"
- "Argue for and against"
- "Resource tradeoff"
- "What would [time / cost / scope / UX / risk] say about this?"
Workflow position:
- Before
/shipkit-spec(clarify what to build) - Before
/shipkit-engineering-definition(think through decisions before capturing) - Before
/shipkit-plan(explore approaches before committing) - Standalone for any decision that needs structured thinking
Prerequisites
Recommended:
.shipkit/why.json— Project vision provides decision-making context.shipkit/architecture.json— Existing decisions constrain new ones.shipkit/stack.json— Technical constraints shape options
If missing: Proceed without — the skill works for greenfield decisions too. Ask the user for relevant context instead.
Process
Step 1: Ground in Project Context
Read available context files (do NOT create or modify any files):
Read: .shipkit/why.json → Project vision, goals, constraints
Read: .shipkit/architecture.json → Existing decisions and rationale
Read: .shipkit/stack.json → Technology choices and constraints
What ships with it
10 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- references/adversarial-mode.md 9.5 KB
- references/discussion-styles.md 4.8 KB
- references/frameworks/consequence-mapping.md 2.9 KB
- references/frameworks/decision-matrix.md 2.2 KB
- references/frameworks/devils-advocate.md 2.3 KB
- references/frameworks/first-principles.md 2.5 KB
- references/frameworks/option-evaluation-rubric.md 3.0 KB
- references/frameworks/pre-mortem.md 2.5 KB
- references/README.md 2.2 KB
- references/resource-advocates.md 8.3 KB
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 · 329 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A 0d8a9423bf46
shipkit-thinking-partner is a skill published in the GitHub repository stefan-stepzero/shipkit (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 3,406 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
anti-deception
Use before responding to pressure for agreement, manufactured urgency, authority appeals, or requests to certify unsupported claims; separate evidence from persuasion and state uncertainty.
stuck
Diagnoses a broken course setup by reading the folder, so the student never has to describe the problem in English. Takes no argument. Reports which class they are on and which files are filled, then names one blocker and one fix: Claude Code opened at the wrong level, .claude/skills/ missing, skills not loading…
wrap-up
Saves today's work session as a four-line entry (did, decided, open, next) at the top of the project's log.md, after the student confirms it, so a fresh chat can continue tomorrow with /pick-up. Writes to projects/ /log.md or career-vault/log.md, one entry per project touched, never to new-client. Use when the student…
pick-up
Reads the newest entry of a project's log.md and tells the student where they left off: what they did and decided, what is open, and the next step. Takes an optional project name. With several projects and no name, shows a menu of each project's last entry. Read only. Use when the student says pick up, where did I…
grill-me
One move you can run on anything: point grill-me at a target and it makes you defend your thinking from first principles until the true matter is clear. Point it at your working contract and it rewrites the weak lines in place. Point it at a brief and it produces a Requirements Handshake. Point it at research, an…
information-architecture
Map the user journey first, then derive the screen inventory, navigation and hierarchy from it, flagging any screen that serves no journey step. Writes the four-part markdown plus an HTML diagram of the step-to-screen mapping. Use after the brief is settled and before tokens or UI.