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 tmusser/ai-engineering-skills --skill analyze-minigit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tmusser/ai-engineering-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/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/analyze-mini)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/analyze-mini"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/analyze-mini/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/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/analyze-mini"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmusser/ai-engineering-skills/analyze-mini.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 | $0.00027 | $0.01101 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00550 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00220 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
analyze-mini 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 9d 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 — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyze Mini
Purpose
Prevent stale or contradictory reasoning from crossing into build-one without turning analysis into a routine gate.
analyze-mini is conditional. The cheap safeguard is an eligibility check over artifacts already being read for build or handoff. Run the full skill only when that check finds a meaningful trigger.
When to use
Run a full analysis when one or more of these are true:
HANDOFF.mdmarks analysisREQUIREDorSTALE- task-defining inputs changed since the last
FRESHanalysis:SPEC.md,PLAN.md,TODO.md, scope-freeze notes, selected task, or a decision/assumption that changes implementation - the selected task cannot be traced cleanly from acceptance criterion to implementation slice to verification
- an unresolved decision or assumption could materially change implementation shape
- compatibility seams, data/metric semantics, or cross-boundary behavior create interpretation risk
- failed verification caused the implementation strategy or plan to change
- reconciling a stale handoff changed the live task state
Do not run a full analysis merely because the skill is installed, because a handoff is being written, or because no prior analysis exists.
Missing prior analysis is not, by itself, a trigger.
Staleness is event-driven, not time-driven. A checkpoint does not expire just because time passed.
Inputs
Use the smallest relevant set:
- Selected task
SPEC.mdPLAN.md/TODO.mdwhen they exist- Scope-freeze boundary
- Relevant
HANDOFF.mdstate when resuming VERIFY.mdwhen a failure or changed strategy is part of the trigger- Only the source files needed to resolve a specific contradiction
Passive eligibility check
Before invoking the full skill, reuse artifacts already loaded for build-one or handoff and ask:
- Did a task-defining input change since the last trustworthy checkpoint?
- Is there an unresolved decision or assumption that could change the implementation?
- Can the selected task still map cleanly from acceptance criterion to verification without contradicting a non-goal, spec ceiling, or scope boundary?
- Did a failed attempt or resume reconciliation create a new implementation uncertainty?
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 114 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 55756b8a8f55
analyze-mini is a skill published in the GitHub repository tmusser/ai-engineering-skills (4 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 1,101 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
awsl
Run Claude Code JavaScript Workflows through the awsl compatibility runtime. Use when an agent's current task or loaded Skill requires dispatching a Claude Code Workflow but the host cannot execute that Workflow natively, or when awsl workflow inspection, durable run state, resume, or provider diagnostics are needed.
dwi-all-in-one
Apply the relevant Dwi lenses together when several observed workflow problems co-occur. Select only the lenses the task needs, preserve a silent fast path for clear reversible work, and keep authority and evidence explicit. Prefer a focused module when one issue dominates.
dwi-arc
Structure genuinely multi-agent coding work into bounded cells with one writer per scope, explicit integration, and independent review. Use when several disjoint workstreams justify coordination. Do not use for small tasks, overlapping writers, speculative agent fleets, or process artifacts without demonstrated value.
dwi-bridge
Coordinate bounded work between native Claude and Codex workflows with explicit authority, scope, and evidence. Use for read-only consultation or explicitly authorized execution delegation. Do not create a new connector, share secrets, treat messages as authorization, or allow recursive delegation.
dwi-budget
Set and report practical token, context, time, tool-call, and coordination boundaries for coding-agent work. Use when resource use is unclear or needs a checkpoint. Do not invent measurements, monetary savings, cache benefit, or precision that the harness does not expose.
dwi-evidence
Label coding-agent claims by evidence status, preserve provenance and failures, and separate static, runtime, and human proof. Use before completion, comparison, promotion, or handoff. Do not upgrade observations into guarantees or fabricate missing measurements and approvals.