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 StephenQiu30/stephen-claude --skill pullgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/StephenQiu30/stephen-claudeWrote 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/stephenqiu30/stephen-claude/pull)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/stephenqiu30/stephen-claude/pull"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stephenqiu30/stephen-claude/pull/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/stephenqiu30/stephen-claude/pull"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stephenqiu30/stephen-claude/pull.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 | $0.00051 | $0.01039 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00416 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00208 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
pull 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to pull — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 101 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pull
Workflow
- Verify git status is clean or commit/stash changes before merging.
- Ensure rerere is enabled locally:
git config rerere.enabled truegit config rerere.autoupdate true
- Confirm remotes and branches:
- Ensure the
originremote exists. - Ensure the current branch is the one to receive the merge.
- Ensure the
- Fetch latest refs:
git fetch origin
- Sync the remote feature branch first:
git pull --ff-only origin $(git branch --show-current)- This pulls branch updates made remotely (for example, a GitHub auto-commit)
before merging
origin/main.
- Merge in order:
- Prefer
git -c merge.conflictstyle=zdiff3 merge origin/mainfor clearer conflict context.
- Prefer
- If conflicts appear, resolve them (see conflict guidance below), then:
git add <files>git commit(orgit merge --continueif the merge is paused)
- Verify with project checks (follow repo policy in
AGENTS.md). - Summarize the merge:
- Call out the most challenging conflicts/files and how they were resolved.
- Note any assumptions or follow-ups.
Conflict Resolution Guidance (Best Practices)
- Inspect context before editing:
- Use
git statusto list conflicted files. - Use
git difforgit diff --mergeto see conflict hunks. - Use
git diff :1:path/to/file :2:path/to/fileandgit diff :1:path/to/file :3:path/to/fileto compare base vs ours/theirs for a file-level view of intent. - With
merge.conflictstyle=zdiff3, conflict markers include:<<<<<<<ours,|||||||base,=======split,>>>>>>>theirs.- Matching lines near the start/end are trimmed out of the conflict region, so focus on the differing core.
- Summarize the intent of both changes, decide the semantically correct
outcome, then edit:
- State what each side is trying to achieve (bug fix, refactor, rename, behavior change).
- Identify the shared goal, if any, and whether one side supersedes the other.
- Decide the final behavior first; only then craft the code to match that decision.
- Prefer preserving invariants, API contracts, and user-visible behavior unless the conflict clearly indicates a deliberate change.
- Open files and understand intent on both sides before choosing a resolution.
- Use
- Prefer minimal, intention-preserving edits:
- Keep behavior consistent with the branch’s purpose.
- Avoid accidental deletions or silent behavior changes.
- Resolve one file at a time and rerun tests after each logical batch.
- Use
ours/theirsonly when you are certain one side should win entirely. - For complex conflicts, search for related files or definitions to align with the rest of the codebase.
- For generated files, resolve non-generated conflicts first, then regenerate:
- Prefer resolving source files and handwritten logic before touching generated artifacts.
- Run the CLI/tooling command that produced the generated file to recreate it cleanly, then stage the regenerated output.
- For import conflicts where intent is unclear, accept both sides first:
- Keep all candidate imports temporarily, finish the merge, then run lint/type checks to remove unused or incorrect imports safely.
- After resolving, ensure no conflict markers remain:
git diff --check
- When unsure, note assumptions and ask for confirmation before finalizing the merge.
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 · 101 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 7aa0ef5cd877
pull is a skill published in the GitHub repository StephenQiu30/stephen-claude (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 1,039 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to pull, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
changelog-scan
Scan merged PRs and commits since a given reference, extract titles, labels, types, and signals. Produces structured input for release notes drafting.
draft-release-notes
Turn changelog-scan output into polished, categorized release notes draft. Propose only.
github-workflow-automation
Advanced GitHub Actions workflow automation with AI swarm coordination, intelligent CI/CD pipelines, and comprehensive repository management.
deploy-python-project
Validate and deploy this generated Python project using its selected target, portable Docker base, and optional Pulumi or Terraform configuration. Use for deployment preparation, local container checks, cloud previews, release rollout, health verification, or deployment troubleshooting.
cpv-setup-marketplace-auto-notification
Use when configuring a plugin to notify its marketplace after each release so Claude Code can auto-update users. Universal CI recipe for any plugin/marketplace pair. Used dynamically via cpv-the-skills-menu (TRDD-478d9687).
github-workflow-automation
Advanced GitHub Actions workflow automation with AI swarm coordination, intelligent CI/CD pipelines, and comprehensive repository management.