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/techygarg/lattice/code-forgenpx skills add techygarg/lattice --skill code-forgegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/techygarg/latticeWhat 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 | $0.00081 | $0.02526 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00041 | $0.01263 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00505 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00253 |
Grade A, and why
code-forge 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 2d 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 — 138 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Forge
Required Skills
Read and apply:
framework:knowledge-priming-- Load project context (stack, architecture, conventions) so implementation matches the real project. (always)framework:context-anchoring-- Find and load the feature's context anchor doc; enrich it as implementation decisions are made (Create / Load / Enrich behaviors). (always)framework:learning-harvest-- Load prior operational learnings to inform implementation at session start; harvest new ones at session end. (always)framework:collaborative-judgment-- Surface genuine judgment calls as structured options instead of silently assuming. (always)framework:architecture-- Layer placement, dependency direction, structural validation. (always)framework:clean-code-- Craft guardrails: SRP, naming, complexity, error handling. (always)framework:domain-driven-design-- Aggregates, entities, value objects, domain services. (conditional: domain-layer components only)framework:secure-coding-- Trust bounds, injection prevention, secrets handling. (conditional: trust-boundary code only)framework:test-quality-- AAA structure, isolation, assertion quality, naming. (always when writing tests)
Workflow
Step 1: Establish Implementation Context
- Run
framework:learning-harvestLoad behavior. Focus hint: "implementation session — focus: implementation craft, quality signals, reliability". - Run
framework:context-anchoringDocument Discovery: scan the context base directory (per the atom's Config Resolution) for an existing anchor doc covering this feature's implementation.- Found → Load behavior. Present the structured acknowledgment: feature name, status, decision count, open questions, constraints. STOP: Honor every logged decision and constraint as an active commitment.
- Not found → ask the user: "Is there a design doc or blueprint for this feature, or do we work from what we've discussed?" Accept either answer gracefully:
- Doc provided → load it and follow it.
- Proceed without → all atom rails still apply; there is simply no approved design doc to reference. Work from the verbal requirements in conversation.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 138 lines · 81 tokens per session scan A 519566d6f37e
code-forge is a skill published in the GitHub repository techygarg/lattice (181 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 81 tokens to every session and 2,526 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
xiaoyaoclaw-workspace-initializer
OpenClaw workspace initialization & standardization. Sets up a proper agent home: standard directory structure (projects/tasks/outputs/knowledge/scripts/ memory/tmp) + WORKSPACE.md rules + multi-agent config safety (config.patch, never config.apply) + memory log. Use when an agent enters a new/empty workspace root, or…
learn
Search, install, update, and rate AI agent skills from agentskill.sh (100,000+ skills). Use when the user asks to find skills, install extensions or plugins, discover new capabilities, check what skills are available, or says "how do I do X" when a skill might help. Also handles listing installed skills, checking for…
review-skill
Review and improve AI agent skills (SKILL.md files) against best practices from the Agent Skills specification and Anthropic's authoring guidelines. Scores skills on 10 quality dimensions, identifies specific issues, and rewrites problem areas. Use when creating, editing, auditing, or improving agent skills. Triggers…
building-chatgpt-apps
Guides creation of ChatGPT Apps with interactive widgets using OpenAI Apps SDK and MCP servers. Use when building ChatGPT custom apps with visual UI components, embedded widgets, or rich interactive experiences. Covers widget architecture, MCP server setup with FastMCP, response metadata, and Developer Mode…
multi-agent-patterns
Design multi-agent architectures for complex tasks. Use when single-agent context limits are exceeded, when tasks decompose naturally into subtasks, or when specializing agents improves quality.
doc-coauthoring
Guide users through a structured workflow for co-authoring documentation. Use when user wants to write documentation, proposals, technical specs, decision docs, or similar structured content. This workflow helps users efficiently transfer context, refine content through iteration, and verify the doc works for readers.…