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 Totes-MickGOATs/opus-pocus --skill alohomoragit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Totes-MickGOATs/opus-pocusWrote 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/totes-mickgoats/opus-pocus/alohomora)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/totes-mickgoats/opus-pocus/alohomora"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/totes-mickgoats/opus-pocus/alohomora/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/totes-mickgoats/opus-pocus/alohomora"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/totes-mickgoats/opus-pocus/alohomora.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 | $0.00160 | $0.01453 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00080 | $0.00727 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00291 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00145 |
Grade A, and why
alohomora 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 10d 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 — 83 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
🐉 Alohomora
"Your guard locked a door it was never asked to watch."
The asymmetry is the whole point: a noisy advisory costs tokens, but a false-positive blocking guard costs the job. And it does not merely stop the work — it teaches agents to route around it, in ways nobody reviews and no test covers. Every over-broad guard trains the exact behaviour the guard exists to prevent, then hides the evidence, because a workaround leaves no failure to find.
What to scan
- Every guard that refuses rather than warns — pre-tool hooks, pre-commit gates, CI blockers
- Their path/scope resolution: what root they resolve against, and what they do with anything outside it
- Their block messages, read as instructions — agents obey block text verbatim
- Their escape hatches: existence, TTL, attribution, ceiling
- Their test suites, specifically the negative cases: the legitimate inputs they must not block
This spell's subject is guards you wrote. On a repo whose only guards are husky,
lint-staged and branch protection, the prescriptions below do not apply — you cannot cap
git commit --no-verify, and branch protection's escape is an admin override the platform already
attributes in its audit log. Report N/A — no repo-owned blocking guards, and say that is
what you found rather than reporting a clean sweep of an empty set.
Anti-patterns to find
- Out-of-scope paths resolved as in-scope. Relative, home-prefixed (
~/…) or symlinked paths resolved against the wrong root. Measured example: a repo-isolation guard blocked a write to a directory outside the repository entirely, because it resolved a~-prefixed absolute path as repo-relative — the guard's own subject was never involved. - A shared-resource guard applied to work that does not touch the resource. A stage-everything guard firing inside a different repository; a lease check on an operation that takes no lease. The rule is right; its domain is wrong.
- Matching on the symptom instead of emitter AND condition. The guard keys on a surface string rather than on who emitted it and under what condition — so the eventual narrowing suppresses real cases along with false ones, and nobody can tell which.
- No escape hatch, or an unbounded one. Either the guard has no override at all — so the only route past it is a workaround nobody reviews — or the override is untimed, unattributed and uncapped, which is not an escape but a permanent hole with better manners.
- A block message naming a dead route. Block text is an instruction agents follow literally. A remedy that no longer exists is worse than no remedy: it sends every blocked agent down a path that fails a second time, and the second failure looks like the agent's fault.
- Severity mismatched to consequence. Blocking where an advisory would do (refusing legitimate work over a stylistic rule), and advising where only a block will hold (a destructive or irreversible action behind a warning agents can and do proceed past).
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 83 lines · 160 tokens per session scan A 9743d1cb57ec
alohomora is a skill published in the GitHub repository Totes-MickGOATs/opus-pocus (10 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 160 tokens to every session and 1,453 once invoked, about $0.0008 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
manage-skills
A maintenance workflow for checking whether project verification skills still cover the code and rules that changed during a session.
error-translator
A Chinese-language assistant that translates English programming errors and explains what they mean. It covers common errors from languages and frameworks including Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, Java, and others.
eslint-fix
A project-aware assistant for finding and fixing ESLint errors, warnings, and configuration compatibility problems. ESLint is a tool that checks JavaScript and TypeScript code for style and common mistakes.
perf-profiler
A performance investigation guide that uses repeatable measurements and profiling evidence to find where software spends time or resources. Profiling records runtime activity such as CPU use, memory use, database work, or network delays.
log-analyzer
A log-analysis helper that reads application and system logs to find unusual patterns and likely causes. Logs are records of events such as errors, requests, warnings, and service activity.
review-loop
Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…