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 agentmods add skills/usk6666/yorishiro-proxy/implementnpx skills add usk6666/yorishiro-proxy --skill implementgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/usk6666/yorishiro-proxyWrote 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/usk6666/yorishiro-proxy/implement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/usk6666/yorishiro-proxy/implement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/usk6666/yorishiro-proxy/implement.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 | $0.00022 | $0.01081 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00541 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00216 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00108 |
Grade A, and why
implement 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 4d 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 — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/implement
An end-to-end workflow skill for implementing a Linear Issue through to PR creation.
Arguments
/implement <Issue ID>— Implement the specified Issue (e.g.,/implement USK-12)
Steps
- Load Issue: Fetch Issue details with
mcp__linear-server__get_issue - Update Issue status: Update status to "In Progress"
- Create branch: Generate an appropriate branch name from the Issue
- feat:
feat/<id>-<short-desc> - fix:
fix/<id>-<short-desc> - other:
chore/<id>-<short-desc>
- feat:
- Design review (mandatory for any Issue that introduces a new public type, modifies an interface, or touches more than one package; skip for docstring-only / test-only / single-call-site fixes — note the skip reason in the user-facing plan): launch the design-reviewer agent. See "Design Review Invocation" below.
- Present plan to user: Issue summary, file actions (new / modified / untouched), key resolved decisions from the design review, deferred items, unresolved questions. Get user confirmation before implementing. For trivial Issues that skipped Step 4, present a one-paragraph plan instead.
- Implement: Implement code based on the plan
- Write tests: Write tests for the implementation
- Verify:
- Auto-format with
gofmt -w . make lint(gofmt check + go vet + staticcheck + ineffassign)make buildmake test
- Auto-format with
- Commit: Commit in Conventional Commits format
- Include
Refs: <Issue ID>in the commit message footer
- Include
- Push: Push to remote with
git push -u origin <branch-name> - Create PR:
- Review changes with
git diff main...HEAD - PR title in Conventional Commits format (e.g.,
feat(protocol): add HTTP handler) - PR body follows the template below
- Create PR with
gh pr create
- Review changes with
- Update Issue status: Update status to "In Review"
- Report results: Display implementation summary + PR URL
Design Review Invocation
Read .claude/agents/design-reviewer.md and replace the placeholders before launching:
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 92 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 65d3fd7be45a
implement is a skill published in the GitHub repository usk6666/yorishiro-proxy (16 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 1,081 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
ship
Stop juggling, start finishing. GSD Task Manager makes it easy to sort your to-dos into what’s urgent and what’s important, so you can finally get stuff done without burning out. It’s simple, visual, and works entirely offline.
cursor-agents-workflow
Human handoff, Linear branch names, reviewable (non-draft) PRs, Claude, Greptile, and Codex review comments, preview test steps, proof of work posted on the GitHub PR, and review-doubt notes for Cursor agents. Use when a Cursor Cloud or Cursor desktop agent implements a Linear issue, opens a GitHub PR, asks a human to…
Technical Debt Tracking with PMAT
Tracks and manages technical debt using PMAT (Pragmatic AI Labs MCP Agent Toolkit). Use this skill when: User asks about technical debt, TODO comments, or code quality issues Planning sprint work and need to prioritize debt repayment Conducting code audits or technical debt assessments Tracking debt accumulation…
omh-ralph-task
Execute one omh-ralph task: file-scope, commit, report.
implementation_needs_rework
Return issue to plan-ready status for re-implementation after major review issues.
promote-idea
Promote an Inbox bullet from BACKLOG.md to either a GitHub issue (work commitment) or a briefing (briefings/B-NNNN-.md, research/decision support). Asks which based on whether the work is committed or still needs thinking. Removes the original bullet.