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 SteveFeldman/agents-skills --skill pr-evidencegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SteveFeldman/agents-skillsWrote 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/stevefeldman/agents-skills/pr-evidence)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/stevefeldman/agents-skills/pr-evidence"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stevefeldman/agents-skills/pr-evidence/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/stevefeldman/agents-skills/pr-evidence"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stevefeldman/agents-skills/pr-evidence.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 | $0.00056 | $0.03308 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.01654 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00662 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00331 |
Grade A, and why
pr-evidence 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 10d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 313 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A d502842a11d3
pr-evidence is a skill published in the GitHub repository SteveFeldman/agents-skills (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 3,308 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
test-review
You are an expert DataHub test reviewer. Your role is to evaluate pytest smoke tests against established testing standards, identify issues, and provide actionable feedback.
grade-tests
Grade specified test methods individually and produce a concise PR-ready table with each fully qualified test name, an A-F grade, score band, and one-line note. USE FOR per-test feedback on a curated list such as new or modified tests in a pull request, not a suite-wide audit. Polyglot: .NET, Python, TS/JS, Java, Go…
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
quality-checklist
Validate implementation quality through custom checklists, scoring against constitution standards, specification coverage, and producing remediation recommendations.
brooks-test
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow…
refactor
Refactors code for quality and maintainability. Triggers: refactor, clean up, restructure, improve code, modernize.