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 synaptiai/agent-capability-standard --skill rollbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/synaptiai/agent-capability-standardWrote 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/synaptiai/agent-capability-standard/rollback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/synaptiai/agent-capability-standard/rollback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/synaptiai/agent-capability-standard/rollback/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/synaptiai/agent-capability-standard/rollback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/synaptiai/agent-capability-standard/rollback.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 | $0.00035 | $0.02406 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00962 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00481 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00241 |
Grade A, and why
rollback 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 — 285 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Intent
Execute rollback to restore system state to a previously created checkpoint. This is the recovery mechanism in the CAVR (Checkpoint-Act-Verify-Rollback) pattern - used when mutations fail or produce undesired outcomes.
Success criteria:
- State fully restored to checkpoint state
- Post-rollback hash matches checkpoint hash
- No orphaned artifacts remain from failed mutation
- Audit trail of what was reverted
Compatible schemas:
schemas/output_schema.yaml
Inputs
| Parameter | Required | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
checkpoint_id |
Yes | string | ID of checkpoint to restore to |
scope |
No | array | Specific files/keys to rollback (default: all in checkpoint) |
verify_restore |
No | boolean | Whether to verify state matches checkpoint after restore (default: true) |
reason |
No | string | Why rollback is being performed (for audit) |
Procedure
-
Validate checkpoint: Confirm checkpoint exists and is valid
- Look up checkpoint by ID in
.checkpoints/or git stash - Verify checkpoint integrity (hash check)
- Confirm checkpoint has not expired
- If checkpoint missing: FAIL immediately with clear error
- Look up checkpoint by ID in
-
Capture current state: Record what will be reverted
- List all files/state that differ from checkpoint
- Compute hash of current state for audit
- Document changes that will be undone
-
Execute restoration: Apply the restore command
- For git_stash:
git stash poporgit stash apply - For file_backup: Copy from
.checkpoints/<id>/to original locations - For state_snapshot: Restore state variables
- Handle any conflicts or errors gracefully
- For git_stash:
-
Verify restoration: Confirm state matches checkpoint
- Recompute hash of restored state
- Compare with checkpoint's pre_mutation_state.hash
- Check for orphaned files created during failed mutation
- Clean up orphaned artifacts if present
-
Ground claims: Attach evidence of successful rollback
- Format:
tool:bash:<restore_command>, comparison output - Include before/after state hashes
- Format:
What ships with it
3 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.
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 · 285 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 4e122829160e
rollback is a skill published in the GitHub repository synaptiai/agent-capability-standard (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 2,406 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
resolving-merge-conflicts
Use when a git merge or rebase reports conflicts and the operation is in progress.
git-investigate
Git history investigation. Use when: tracking code changes, finding where bugs were introduced, root cause analysis. Not for: code exploration (use code-explore), issue analysis (use issue-analyze). Output: history trace + root cause report.
cordis-plugin-sofagent-rollback
A sofagent plugin for undoing changes in reverse order after an error, using Git snapshots and cleanup handlers for registered effects.
Cross-File Leakage リファクタ後の caller 側残骸検出
A code review check for structural changes such as renamed functions, changed arguments, moved files, or split modules. It searches the rest of the project for callers that still use the old structure.
deep-code-review
Use when reviewing current branch for bugs before pushing or merging, when wanting a thorough multi-agent review of local changes, or when preparing work for human review.
merge-conflict-resolution
Detect, classify (porcelain status; complexity: trivial, semantic, structural, delete-modify), and resolve git merge conflicts through per-file strategy selection (accept-ours, accept-theirs, manual-merge, rebase), manual conflict hunk parsing, and post-resolution verification (orphaned markers, build, tests). Use…