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 tk-logl/sentinel --skill ai-mistakesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tk-logl/sentinelWrote 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/tk-logl/sentinel/ai-mistakes)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tk-logl/sentinel/ai-mistakes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tk-logl/sentinel/ai-mistakes.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00037 | $0.01796 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00898 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00359 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00180 |
Grade A, and why
ai-mistakes 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 8d 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 — 200 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
47 AI Coding Mistake Patterns
A comprehensive catalog of mistakes that AI coding assistants frequently make. Organized by severity.
How to Use This Guide
- During code review: Check changed code against each applicable pattern
- Before claiming completion: Verify none of these patterns are present in your work
- When debugging: Check if the bug matches a known pattern
- When planning: Design your approach to avoid these patterns from the start
CRITICAL (12 patterns) — Must fix immediately. These cause production failures or security holes.
#1 False Completion Claim
Symptom: Saying "done" or "complete" without running verification commands. Prevention: ALWAYS run tests, build, and lint BEFORE claiming done. Show the output. Rule: No completion claim without fresh command output as evidence.
#2 Phantom Code Reference
Symptom: Importing or calling a function/class that doesn't exist.
Prevention: grep -rn "function_name" . before using any reference. Check imports resolve.
Rule: Every import must resolve to an actual file/module. Every function call must have a definition.
#3 Silent Error Swallowing
Symptom: except: pass, catch(e) {}, ignoring error return values.
Prevention: Every error handler must log, re-raise, or explicitly handle the error condition.
Rule: No bare except, no empty catch blocks, no ignored errors.
#4 Test That Tests Nothing
Symptom: assert True, assert response is not None, expect(true).toBe(true).
Prevention: Every test must assert specific behavior — values, side effects, or state changes.
Rule: Each test function must have at least one meaningful assertion about business logic.
#5 Abandoned Test Code
Symptom: Test files created but not included in test runner, or test code left in production. Prevention: Run the test suite and verify your test file appears in the output. Rule: Every test file must be discovered and run by the test runner.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 200 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 48b8dc99cab9
ai-mistakes is a skill published in the GitHub repository tk-logl/sentinel (4 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 1,796 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…