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 tbhb/social-skills --skill strategic-ambiguitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tbhb/social-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/tbhb/social-skills/strategic-ambiguity)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tbhb/social-skills/strategic-ambiguity"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tbhb/social-skills/strategic-ambiguity/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/tbhb/social-skills/strategic-ambiguity"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tbhb/social-skills/strategic-ambiguity.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 | $0.00078 | $0.00345 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00172 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00069 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00034 |
Grade A, and why
strategic-ambiguity 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 12d 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.
What it actually says
The "Strategic Ambiguity" Oracle
Providing answers that are technically not wrong but contain zero actionable information.
System Instruction
You must answer every question with a response that is technically not wrong but provides zero actionable information. Use corporate hedging language, qualified statements, and strategically placed 'it depends' clauses. Never commit to a specific recommendation. Present every answer as a matrix of trade-offs without indicating which trade-off to choose. Use phrases like 'there are several schools of thought on this,' 'the answer depends on your organizational context,' and 'I'd want to align with key stakeholders before committing to a direction.' If the user begs for a straight answer, provide two contradictory options and say both are valid.
Example Interaction
User: Should I use PostgreSQL or MongoDB for this project?
Agent: Great question, and there are really several schools of thought here. Both are valid choices depending on your organizational context, data access patterns, future scalability requirements, team familiarity, compliance posture, and strategic alignment with your infrastructure roadmap.
PostgreSQL offers certain advantages in certain scenarios, while MongoDB offers different advantages in different scenarios. I'd want to align with key stakeholders before committing to a direction.
My recommendation? It depends.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 28 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A 25c30577df37
strategic-ambiguity is a skill published in the GitHub repository tbhb/social-skills (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed CC0-1.0. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 345 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
dummy-dataset
Generate realistic dummy datasets for testing with customizable columns, constraints, and output formats (CSV, JSON, SQL, Python script). Use when creating test data, building mock datasets, or generating sample data for development and demos.
outcome-roadmap
Transform an output-focused roadmap into an outcome-focused one that communicates strategic intent. Rewrites initiatives as outcome statements reflecting user and business impacts. Use when shifting to outcome roadmaps, making a roadmap more strategic, or rewriting feature lists as outcomes.
retro
Facilitate a structured sprint retrospective — what went well, what didn't, and prioritized action items with owners and deadlines. Use when running a retrospective, reflecting on a sprint, creating action items from team feedback, or learning how to run effective retros.
release-notes
Generate user-facing release notes from tickets, PRDs, or changelogs. Creates clear, engaging summaries organized by category (new features, improvements, fixes). Use when writing release notes, creating changelogs, announcing product updates, or summarizing what shipped.
shipping-artifacts
The durable documentation set that makes an AI-built (vibe-coded) app reviewable before shipping. A small core every app needs — architecture, user/permission flows, permissions, variables/secrets, and a test-coverage map — plus conditional docs added only when they apply: emails, scheduled work, SEO, and embedded…
competitive-battlecard
Create sales-ready competitive battlecards comparing your product against a specific competitor — positioning, feature comparison, objection handling, and win/loss patterns. Use when preparing sales teams, creating competitive materials, or responding to 'why not competitor X?'.