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 to-real/cognition-workbench --skill discuss-cognitiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/to-real/cognition-workbenchWrote 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/to-real/cognition-workbench/discuss-cognition)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/to-real/cognition-workbench/discuss-cognition"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/to-real/cognition-workbench/discuss-cognition/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/to-real/cognition-workbench/discuss-cognition"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/to-real/cognition-workbench/discuss-cognition.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 | $0.00080 | $0.00549 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00032 | $0.00220 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
discuss-cognition 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 1mo 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 — 48 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
认知讨论台
Act as a research facilitator. Help the user form and revise their own judgment; do not rush to a standard answer.
Start the discussion
- Identify the topic and the user's current claim or uncertainty. If the topic is missing, ask one focused question.
- Call
retrieve_contextwith the topic before substantive analysis. Use relevant prior cognition, and label its status and confidence. - For current or disputed facts, research fresh sources. Prefer official material, primary data, research, executive statements, and then high-quality reporting. Separate facts, inferences, industry views, and personal judgments.
- Build a provisional topic map. Adapt its branches to the issue; common lenses include model capability, product and user value, business competition, implementation and organization, and wider industry effects.
Advance one branch per turn
Each turn must contain:
- A compact guide: one frame, fact pattern, tension, or counterargument.
- At most one clearly relevant connection to prior cognition.
- Exactly one question for the user.
Let the user agree, reject, qualify, or open a new branch. Update the topic map from the response. Do not dump a full report, ask several questions, or simulate multiple personas by default. Introduce an explicit opposing role only when a real disagreement benefits from it.
Decide when to close
Suggest consolidation only when:
- The essential branches have been discussed.
- The user has a provisional judgment with reasons.
- Important counterevidence has been considered.
- Unresolved questions are named.
The user decides whether to continue or close.
Consolidate safely
After the user agrees to close:
- Produce a topic overview containing the issue, topic map, current judgment, supporting and opposing evidence, related prior cognition, confidence, unresolved questions, and reusable frameworks.
- Call
create_update_candidatefor the topic overview and only the independently reusable cognition units. A candidate is a review item, not formal knowledge. - Show what will be recorded and wait for explicit confirmation.
- Call
confirm_update_candidateonly after the user explicitly confirms that candidate. Never supplyCONFIRMEDon the user's behalf.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 48 lines · 80 tokens per session scan A 074a1601e3b3
discuss-cognition is a skill published in the GitHub repository to-real/cognition-workbench (0 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 80 tokens to every session and 549 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
brain-onboard
An onboarding workflow that helps another person create and use their own private knowledge store, sometimes called a second brain. It gathers their information with consent, saves it in their own workspace, and demonstrates a first useful result.
review
A spaced-repetition review system for Obsidian notes, using FSRS-6, an algorithm that schedules reviews when they are most useful for memory.
autology-tutorial
Use when user is new to Autology, asks "how does Autology work", wants to learn about knowledge capture, or requests a guided introduction.
obsidian-bases
Explain, draft, and validate Obsidian Bases .base files with filters, formulas, properties, summaries, and table, card, list, or version-gated kanban views. Use for Obsidian Bases, database-like vault views, dynamic tables, reading lists, task trackers, filters, formulas, summaries, and .base file edits.
wiki-retrieve
Build and query a vault-local contextual BM25 retrieval index with optional multilingual Nomic cosine reranking; use for retrieve, hybrid retrieval, BM25, rerank, contextual retrieval, chunk search, vault search, semantic search, find relevant passages, or retrieval diagnostics. Derived caches stay under .vault-meta…
mindos
MindOS: local knowledge assistant & shared KB. Keeps decisions, notes, SOPs, debugging lessons, research findings, preferences across sessions/agents. Core: save notes, search KB, organize files, run workflows, review, append CSV, hand off context, distill lessons. NOT for app source or paths outside KB. Triggers…