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 terrylica/cc-skills --skill contributegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/terrylica/cc-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/terrylica/cc-skills/contribute)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/terrylica/cc-skills/contribute"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/terrylica/cc-skills/contribute/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/terrylica/cc-skills/contribute"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/terrylica/cc-skills/contribute.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00025 | $0.03171 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.01586 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00634 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00317 |
Grade A, and why
contribute 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 4d 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 — 476 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Git-Town Contribution Workflow — STOP AND READ
This workflow guides you through a complete contribution cycle using git-town.
Self-Evolving Skill: This skill improves through use. If instructions are wrong, parameters drifted, or a workaround was needed — fix this file immediately, don't defer. Only update for real, reproducible issues.
⛔ WORKFLOW ENFORCEMENT
YOU MUST USE GIT-TOWN COMMANDS. RAW GIT BRANCH COMMANDS ARE FORBIDDEN.
| Step | ✅ Correct | ❌ Forbidden |
|---|---|---|
| Create branch | git town hack |
git checkout -b |
| Update branch | git town sync |
git pull, git fetch, git merge |
| Create PR | git town propose |
Manual GitHub UI |
| Merge PR | git town ship |
git merge + git push |
Phase 0: Preflight — MANDATORY
Step 0.1: Create TodoWrite
TodoWrite with todos:
- "[Contribute] Phase 0: Verify fork workflow is configured" | in_progress
- "[Contribute] Phase 0: Check workspace is clean" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 0: Sync with upstream" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 1: GATE - Confirm feature branch creation" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 1: Create feature branch with git town hack" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 2: Implement changes" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 2: Commit changes (raw git allowed here)" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 2: Sync branch before PR" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 3: GATE - Confirm PR creation" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 3: Create PR with git town propose" | pending
- "[Contribute] Phase 4: (Optional) Ship PR with git town ship" | pending
Step 0.2: Verify Fork Workflow Configured
/usr/bin/env bash << 'VERIFY_FORK_EOF'
echo "=== FORK WORKFLOW VERIFICATION ==="
# Check remotes
ORIGIN=$(git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null)
UPSTREAM=$(git remote get-url upstream 2>/dev/null)
if [[ -z "$UPSTREAM" ]]; then
echo "❌ FATAL: upstream remote not configured"
echo "Run: /git-town-workflow:scion to configure"
exit 1
fi
echo "✅ origin: $ORIGIN"
echo "✅ upstream: $UPSTREAM"
# Check git-town config
SYNC_UPSTREAM=$(git config git-town.sync-upstream 2>/dev/null)
if [[ "$SYNC_UPSTREAM" != "true" ]]; then
echo "⚠️ WARNING: git-town.sync-upstream is not true"
echo "Run: git config git-town.sync-upstream true"
fi
# Check current branch
CURRENT_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
echo "Current branch: $CURRENT_BRANCH"
VERIFY_FORK_EOF
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 476 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 7c8702463027
contribute is a skill published in the GitHub repository terrylica/cc-skills (66 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 3,171 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-05.
Other skills, from other repositories
core-workflow
Detailed development workflow patterns, checklists, and standards. Auto-loads for complex tasks, planning, debugging, testing, or when explicit patterns are needed. Contains session protocols, git conventions, security checklists, testing strategy, and communication standards.
code-review-loop
Use when opening a PR for review or when receiving review feedback. Activate for keywords like "code review", "PR review", "request review", "review feedback", "address comments", "reviewer said". Covers both ends of the loop: preparing a reviewable PR and acting on feedback rigorously. Always engage with every…
trace-scan
Trace scan (§4.1/§4.2): before a commit, scans the staged changes and the message for AI traces (co-author trailers, footers, robot emoji, tool names) and vendor template names. The git hooks apply it automatically.
finalize-pr
Automatically finalize pull requests for merge by resolving CodeQL violations, review threads, merge conflicts, and CI failures. Handles single PR (current branch or by number), all open PRs in the repo, or all open PRs across the org. Includes bot-authored PRs in all modes.
ship
Commit, push, create PR(s), and auto-finalize — full automation pipeline. Handles uncommitted changes and recently created PRs.
resolve-pr-threads
Orchestrates resolution of GitHub PR review threads AND reads recent non-thread PR comments (top-level + review bodies) by grouping related feedback, processing each group sequentially inline with superpowers:receiving-code-review, and resolving threads via GraphQL. Use when you need to batch-process review feedback…