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/thangchung/agent-engineering-experiment/inc-implnpx skills add thangchung/agent-engineering-experiment --skill inc-implgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/thangchung/agent-engineering-experimentWhat 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 | $0.00051 | $0.01939 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00970 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00388 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00194 |
Grade A, and why
inc-impl 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 3d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to incremental-implementation — 21 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 245 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Incremental Implementation
Overview
Build in thin vertical slices — implement one piece, test it, verify it, then expand. Avoid implementing an entire feature in one pass. Each increment should leave the system in a working, testable state. This is the execution discipline that makes large features manageable.
When to Use
- Implementing any multi-file change
- Building a new feature from a task breakdown
- Refactoring existing code
- Any time you're tempted to write more than ~100 lines before testing
When NOT to use: Single-file, single-function changes where the scope is already minimal.
The Increment Cycle
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ Implement ──→ Test ──→ Verify ──┐ │
│ ▲ │ │
│ └───── Commit ◄─────────────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ Next slice │
│ │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
For each slice:
- Implement the smallest complete piece of functionality
- Test — run the test suite (or write a test if none exists)
- Verify — confirm the slice works as expected (tests pass, build succeeds, manual check)
- Commit -- save your progress with a descriptive message (see
git-workflow-and-versioningfor atomic commit guidance) - Move to the next slice — carry forward, don't restart
Slicing Strategies
Vertical Slices (Preferred)
Build one complete path through the stack:
Slice 1: Create a task (DB + API + basic UI)
→ Tests pass, user can create a task via the UI
Slice 2: List tasks (query + API + UI)
→ Tests pass, user can see their tasks
Slice 3: Edit a task (update + API + UI)
→ Tests pass, user can modify tasks
Slice 4: Delete a task (delete + API + UI + confirmation)
→ Tests pass, full CRUD complete
Each slice delivers working end-to-end functionality.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 245 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A f37ce73debbd
inc-impl is a skill published in the GitHub repository thangchung/agent-engineering-experiment (24 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 1,939 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to incremental-implementation, differing in 21 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
git-workflow-and-versioning
Structures git workflow practices. Use when making any code change. Use when committing, branching, resolving conflicts, opening or reviewing a pull request (PR), pushing to a remote, or when you need to organize work across multiple parallel streams. Use when cutting a release, choosing a semantic version bump…
prowler-commit
Creates professional git commits following conventional-commits format. Trigger: When creating commits, after completing code changes, when user asks to commit.
git-commit
Generate well-formatted git commit messages following conventional commit standards.
commits
Use this skill whenever the user asks to commit changes, write or fix a commit message, amend or rename a commit, or do a workflow that includes committing in the IntelliJ repository. This is a thin repo-specific overlay: use IntelliJ commit format, write full commit messages by default, and keep requested suffixes…
contributing
How to contribute to evlog, covering commit and PR conventions, changesets, the Definition of Done, testing rules, and the authored skills that walk through building a new adapter, enricher, framework integration, or map rule. Load this for any question about contributing, opening a PR, or adding something to the…
commit
Commit current changes with a clear, descriptive message.