AuC is a Python framework for running a single AI agent with an asynchronous, pluggable reasoning loop, language-model adapters, permission levels, and observable events. It is used to build coding and conversational agents with tools, security checks, web interfaces, background jobs, evaluations, and isolated execution. The catalogue entries are skills for extending its agent workflow.
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 ufy2024/AuC --skill cpp-coding-standardsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ufy2024/AuCWrote 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/ufy2024/auc/cpp-coding-standards)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ufy2024/auc/cpp-coding-standards"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ufy2024/auc/cpp-coding-standards/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/ufy2024/auc/cpp-coding-standards"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ufy2024/auc/cpp-coding-standards.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 | $0.00048 | $0.06120 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.03060 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.01224 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00612 |
Grade A, and why
cpp-coding-standards 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.
This is a copy
95% identical to cpp-coding-standards — 25 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 — 743 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
C++ Coding Standards (C++ Core Guidelines)
Comprehensive coding standards for modern C++ (C++17/20/23) derived from the C++ Core Guidelines. Enforces type safety, resource safety, immutability, and clarity.
When to Use
- Writing new C++ code (classes, functions, templates)
- Reviewing or refactoring existing C++ code
- Making architectural decisions in C++ projects
- Enforcing consistent style across a C++ codebase
- Choosing between language features (e.g.,
enumvsenum class, raw pointer vs smart pointer)
When NOT to Use
- Non-C++ projects
- Legacy C codebases that cannot adopt modern C++ features
- Embedded/bare-metal contexts where specific guidelines conflict with hardware constraints (adapt selectively)
Cross-Cutting Principles
These themes recur across the entire guidelines and form the foundation:
- RAII everywhere (P.8, R.1, E.6, CP.20): Bind resource lifetime to object lifetime
- Immutability by default (P.10, Con.1-5, ES.25): Start with
const/constexpr; mutability is the exception - Type safety (P.4, I.4, ES.46-49, Enum.3): Use the type system to prevent errors at compile time
- Express intent (P.3, F.1, NL.1-2, T.10): Names, types, and concepts should communicate purpose
- Minimize complexity (F.2-3, ES.5, Per.4-5): Simple code is correct code
- Value semantics over pointer semantics (C.10, R.3-5, F.20, CP.31): Prefer returning by value and scoped objects
Philosophy & Interfaces (P., I.)
Key Rules
| Rule | Summary |
|---|---|
| P.1 | Express ideas directly in code |
| P.3 | Express intent |
| P.4 | Ideally, a program should be statically type safe |
| P.5 | Prefer compile-time checking to run-time checking |
| P.8 | Don't leak any resources |
| P.10 | Prefer immutable data to mutable data |
| I.1 | Make interfaces explicit |
| I.2 | Avoid non-const global variables |
| I.4 | Make interfaces precisely and strongly typed |
| I.11 | Never transfer ownership by a raw pointer or reference |
| I.23 | Keep the number of function arguments low |
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 · 743 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 2933fcb1ad40
cpp-coding-standards is a skill published in the GitHub repository ufy2024/AuC (1,090 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 6,120 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to cpp-coding-standards, differing in 25 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
cpp-coding-standards
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
qt-cpp-review
Invoke when the user asks to review, check, audit, or look over Qt6 C++ code — or suggest before committing. Runs deterministic linting (60+ rules) then six parallel deep- analysis agents covering model contracts, ownership, threading, API correctness, error handling, and performance. Reports only high-confidence…
review-ocaml
Two-phase review of an OCaml project. Use when the user asks to review an OCaml codebase, audit its module interfaces, restructure or redocument .mli files, or hunt for redundancy, dead code and optimisation opportunities across implementations. Phase one reads only dune and .mli files to judge the public interfaces…
frama-c-proofreader
Verify and proofread C code with ACSL using this repository's Frama-C MCP workflow, Frama-C WP static proof, EVA alarms, and optional E-ACSL runtime checks. Use when asked to run Frama-C, check ACSL contracts, explain WP goals, inspect EVA alarms, validate C annotations, or state what a C proof does and does not…
ia-c-systems
C patterns for systems code, libraries, and native extensions: module layout, function decomposition, status-enum errors, memory safety, undefined behavior, and performance measurement. Use when writing, reviewing, refactoring, or debugging C, working with malloc lifetimes, buffer overflows, sanitizers, or Valgrind…
code-reviewer
A code-review procedure for Python, JavaScript, and Go programs. It checks security, performance, maintainability, naming, error handling, and testing.