commitment-setup

A one-time setup for a commitments tracking system that stores obligations, signals, decisions, and parked ideas in a workspace.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it when starting the system: choose a digest channel, create the workspace documentation, and install the triage and digest missions.
Why use it?
It creates a consistent structure for recording commitments and installs workflows for sorting incoming signals and producing digests.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/suyoumo/clawprobench/commitment-setup
Any agent
npx skills add suyoumo/ClawProBench --skill commitment-setup
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/suyoumo/ClawProBench

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 58 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,602 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce 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

Measured yesterday against content hash 3dd6177f1b53, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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.

ironclaw/skills/commitment-setup/SKILL.md · 251 lines

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:

  1. 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

Read the full file on GitHub · 251 lines

Changes

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.

  1. yesterday First seen · 251 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 3dd6177f1b53

Subscribe to this mod's changes

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.

Related

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…

nearform/lastlight · 185 tokens

Evaluation

Frames model, prompt, and system evaluation as a reproducible experiment with baselines, datasets, and explicit metrics.

agentic-in/elephant-agent · 25 tokens

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…

alibaba/open-code-review · 98 tokens

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…

walkinglabs/learn-harness-engineering · 142 tokens

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.

vercel/eve · 38 tokens

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…

vercel/eve · 78 tokens