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/suyoumo/clawprobench/commitment-setupnpx skills add suyoumo/ClawProBench --skill commitment-setupgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/suyoumo/ClawProBenchWhat 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 | $0.00058 | $0.02602 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.01301 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00520 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00260 |
Grade A, and why
commitment-setup 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 yesterday.
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 — 251 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Commitment System Setup
You are installing the commitments tracking system. This creates a workspace structure for tracking obligations, signals, decisions, and parked ideas, plus two missions for automated triage and digest delivery.
Step 1: Check existing setup
Call memory_read(path="projects/commitments/README.md"). If it exists, tell the user: "The commitments system is already set up. Want me to reinstall from scratch?" Stop unless they confirm.
Step 2: Gather user context
The user's timezone is provided by the channel automatically — do not ask for it. Ask only:
- Which channel should I send digests to? (default: the current channel)
Step 3: Write the schema README
Call memory_write with target="projects/commitments/README.md", append=false, and this content:
# Commitments System
Tracks obligations, decisions, and ideas via structured markdown files.
## Directory Layout
- `open/` — Active commitments (one file each)
- `resolved/` — Completed commitments (archived)
- `signals/pending/` — Raw extracted signals awaiting triage
- `signals/expired/` — Signals that were not promoted in time
- `decisions/` — Captured decisions with rationale
- `parked-ideas/` — Ideas saved for later consideration
## Signal Schema (signals/pending/<slug>.md)
---
type: signal
source_channel: <channel name>
source_message: "<brief quote or paraphrase>"
detected_at: <YYYY-MM-DD>
immediacy: realtime | prompt | batch
expires_at: <YYYY-MM-DD> | null
confidence: high | medium | low
obligation_type: reply | deliver | attend | review | decide | follow-up | informational
mentions: [<names>]
destination: null | commitment | parked_idea | intelligence | dismissed
promoted_to: null | <commitment filename>
---
<Human-readable description of what was detected.>
### Immediacy levels
- realtime: push-notify immediately (production incident, market alert, security)
- prompt: surface within the hour (urgent DM, trending topic)
- batch: next digest is fine (meeting action item, report to read)
### Signal destinations
- commitment: actionable, tracked, has a resolution path
- parked_idea: interesting, not committed, revisit later
- intelligence: no action needed, but informs future decisions → write a MemoryDoc via memory_write
- dismissed: not relevant
## Commitment Schema (open/<slug>.md or resolved/<slug>.md)
---
type: commitment
status: open | in_progress | blocked | waiting | resolved
urgency: critical | high | medium | low
due: <YYYY-MM-DD> | null
created_at: <YYYY-MM-DD>
stale_after: <YYYY-MM-DD> | null
owner: user | agent
delegated_to: null | <person or team>
resolution_path: agent_can_handle | needs_reply | needs_decision | note_only
decision_type: mechanical | taste | challenge
effort_human: <estimate> | null
effort_assisted: <estimate> | null
source_signal: <relative path> | null
resolved_by: null | agent | user | delegate | expired
tags: [<freeform>]
---
# <Title>
<Description of the obligation.>
## Resolution path
- [ ] Step 1
- [ ] Step 2
## Progress
<Updates appended over time.>
### Resolution path types
- agent_can_handle: the agent can do this autonomously (review PR, draft doc, research)
- needs_reply: user must send a response to someone
- needs_decision: user must choose between options
- note_only: informational, no action needed but tracked
### Decision types (when to ask the user)
- mechanical: auto-act silently (expire stale signal, update status, dismiss noise). Report in digest as "auto-handled."
- taste: auto-act but surface for awareness ("I auto-dismissed 3 FYI signals, auto-resolved 2 completed items"). User can override.
- challenge: always ask the user before acting (architecture decisions, sending messages, spending money, irreversible actions).
### Effort estimates
When known, include dual estimates:
- effort_human: time without AI assistance (e.g. "2h", "3d")
- effort_assisted: time with AI assistance (e.g. "15min", "2h")
This reframes decisions — when AI makes completeness cheap, there is no excuse for shortcuts.
### Autonomous resolution
When a commitment has resolution_path=agent_can_handle and decision_type=mechanical or taste:
1. Agent handles it and reports in the next digest
When decision_type=challenge:
1. Agent asks for explicit approval before acting
2. On approval, spawns a mission for complex work or handles inline
3. Status transitions to in_progress, then resolved with resolved_by=agent
## Decision Schema (decisions/<date>-<slug>.md)
---
type: decision
decided_at: <YYYY-MM-DD>
context: <topic slug>
participants: [<names>]
confidence: high | medium | low
reversible: true | false
outcome: null | <brief outcome description>
outcome_positive: null | true | false
tags: [<freeform>]
---
# <What was decided>
## Context
<Why this decision was needed.>
## Options considered
1. **Option A** — pros/cons
2. **Option B** — pros/cons
## Rationale
<Why this option was chosen.>
## Outcome
<Filled in later: what happened as a result of this decision.>
## Parked Idea Schema (parked-ideas/<slug>.md)
---
type: parked-idea
parked_at: <YYYY-MM-DD>
source: conversation | triage | research
relevance: high | medium | low
tags: [<freeform>]
---
# <Idea title>
<Description and why it is interesting.>
## Activation trigger
<What would make this worth pursuing.>
## Conventions
- Filenames use lowercase kebab-case: `review-sarah-deck.md`
- Dates are ISO-8601: `YYYY-MM-DD`
- Moving a commitment from open/ to resolved/: write the updated file to resolved/, then overwrite the open/ file with empty content
- One file per entity — never batch multiple commitments into one file
## Trust calibration
Start conservative:
- All signals surfaced in digest, none auto-promoted to commitments
- All agent_can_handle commitments require explicit user approval before dispatch
- Realtime immediacy disabled initially (everything batched)
- Track user feedback patterns in projects/commitments/calibration.md to gradually increase autonomy
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.
- yesterday First seen · 251 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 3dd6177f1b53
commitment-setup is a skill published in the GitHub repository suyoumo/ClawProBench (823 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 2,602 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
lastlight-evals
Scaffold, configure and run a Last Light EVALS workspace — the harness that runs Last Light's real workflows against a mocked GitHub and grades them deterministically. Use when the user wants to "set up / scaffold Last Light Evals", "create an evals workspace or instance", "run evals", "compare models", or author new…
Evaluation
Frames model, prompt, and system evaluation as a reproducible experiment with baselines, datasets, and explicit metrics.
open-code-review
Performs AI-powered code review on Git changes using the ocr CLI from alibaba/open-code-review. Use when the user asks to review code, review a pull request, review staged/unstaged changes, review a commit, or compare branches for code quality issues. Produces line-level review comments and can automatically apply…
harness-creator
Build, audit, and improve harnesses that make AI coding agents reliable: AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md instruction files, feature/state tracking, verification gates, scope boundaries, session handoff, memory persistence, context budgets, tool-permission safety, and multi-agent coordination. Use this whenever a coding agent is…
gh-pr-description
Drafts and reviews GitHub pull request descriptions for the eve repository. Use when opening, updating, or reviewing a PR, or when summarizing a branch for reviewers.
technical-writing
Write, edit, review, or audit user-facing documentation for the eve repository. Use for changes under docs/, documentation tied to eve APIs or CLI behavior, docs work based on Slack or support feedback, and requests to make eve docs clearer, more natural, or less AI-patterned while verifying claims against current…