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 velinussage/brand-gen --skill brand-gen-intent-preservation-tracegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/velinussage/brand-genWrote 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/velinussage/brand-gen/brand-gen-intent-preservation-trace)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/velinussage/brand-gen/brand-gen-intent-preservation-trace"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/velinussage/brand-gen/brand-gen-intent-preservation-trace/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/velinussage/brand-gen/brand-gen-intent-preservation-trace"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/velinussage/brand-gen/brand-gen-intent-preservation-trace.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 | $0.00165 | $0.01984 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00082 | $0.00992 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00033 | $0.00397 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00198 |
Grade A, and why
brand-gen-intent-preservation-trace 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 11d 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 — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
For Sage brand work in Pi, use the paste-ready prompt at docs/prompts/pi-sage-brand-gen-full-pipeline.md. Keep this link instead of copying the full prompt into skill bodies.
Brand-Gen Intent Preservation Trace
Risk addressed: MaterialPlan (pipeline_types.py:72) holds typed fields, but create_material_plan returns a dict, and assemble_generation_scratchpad reads via plan.get("aesthetic_capsule"), plan.get("selected_inspiration_sources"), plan.get("system_mechanic") etc. Many high-information fields are flattened to strings before generation: selected_mechanic_labels becomes "borrow {a} and {b}; avoid {x}" (prompt_assembly.py:670); aesthetic_capsule becomes free-form prose via render_capsule_prompt; surface_strategy_candidates is computed as a list but only the chosen selected_surface_strategy_prompt_directive string survives. Scoring (scoring/program.py) gets brand_dna: str and story_objective: str — the structured plan is gone.
Once intent is a string, downstream stages cannot reason about why something was chosen. Critique can only re-parse prose. Iteration memory captures style_anchor strings without the structured "this anchor came from variant X with score Y because Z." This caps the ceiling of the auto-feedback loop.
What this skill produces
{
"summary": {
"material_plan_fields_total": 28,
"preserved_to_scratchpad": 14,
"preserved_to_scorer": 5,
"preserved_to_iteration_memory": 4,
"lossy_boundaries": [
"plan_builder → prompt_assembly (string render)",
"scratchpad → scoring (only brand_dna/story_objective survive)",
"any → iteration_memory (only style_anchor + score)"
]
},
"field_matrix": [
{
"plan_field": "aesthetic_capsule",
"type": "dict",
"scratchpad": "preserved_dict",
"scorer": "lost — flattened to brand_dna prose",
"iteration_memory": "lost",
"string_render_site": "prompt_assembly.render_capsule_prompt:NNN",
"consequence": "scorer cannot fault palette mismatch except via brand_dna prose; cannot suggest 'try alt capsule X'"
},
{
"plan_field": "selected_mechanic_labels",
"type": "list[str]",
"scratchpad": "preserved_list",
"scorer": "lost — joined as 'borrow X; avoid Y' string",
"iteration_memory": "lost",
"string_render_site": "prompt_assembly.py:670",
"consequence": "iteration cannot promote a single mechanic; entire string treated atomically"
},
{
"plan_field": "surface_strategy_candidates",
"type": "list[dict]",
"scratchpad": "lost — only selected_surface_strategy_prompt_directive (str) survives",
"scorer": "lost",
"iteration_memory": "lost",
"string_render_site": "plan_builder.py:??",
"consequence": "cannot A/B alternative strategies; rejection of selected has no structure to reuse"
}
/* ... per-field ... */
],
"rubric_input_surface": {
"scorer_signature_inputs": ["brand_dna", "story_objective", "rubric_axes"],
"structured_plan_addressable": false,
"minimum_extension": [
"add aesthetic_capsule_id",
"add selected_mechanic_ids: list[str]",
"add inspiration_role_ids: list[str]",
"add experiment_id (per brand-gen-experiment-modeling)"
]
},
"iteration_memory_surface": {
"fields_persisted": ["version_id", "score", "style_anchor", "notes"],
"structured_intent_persisted": false,
"minimum_extension": ["plan_id", "selected_mechanic_ids", "aesthetic_capsule_id"]
}
}
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 136 lines · 165 tokens per session scan A 8b8575ecf6f9
brand-gen-intent-preservation-trace is a skill published in the GitHub repository velinussage/brand-gen (0 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 165 tokens to every session and 1,984 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…