Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vibeic/vibe-icnpx agentmods add skills/vibeic/vibe-ic/gatekeeper-loopWrote 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/vibeic/vibe-ic/gatekeeper-loop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vibeic/vibe-ic/gatekeeper-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vibeic/vibe-ic/gatekeeper-loop/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/vibeic/vibe-ic/gatekeeper-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vibeic/vibe-ic/gatekeeper-loop.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 4 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 3 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- high Tool Misuse · line 384 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- high Tool Misuse · line 384 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- high Tool Misuse · line 384 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
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 | $0.00132 | $0.08885 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00053 | $0.03554 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.01777 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00889 |
Grade A, and why
gatekeeper-loop 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 today.
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 — 618 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Case-study notation. This skill uses
PR-A/branch-Aas the canonical example PR — substitute the real PR number and branch. The rules themselves are chip-AGNOSTIC and apply to any PR againstmain, independent of which IC / vendor / SKU the PR touches. When you adopt this skill, swapPR-A→#<your PR number>andbranch-A→<your head ref>; the structural gates and the merge-queue protocol do not depend on those values.
Gatekeeper Loop — Single-Owner PR-Merge Loop for main
User-facing Flow109 identity
All progress reports to the user MUST use the current stable Flow109 ID and its
1-based position from flow/flow109.json. The ID is execution authority; the
position is display/audit metadata and must never be passed as an entry or exit
step. Read both from the exact source used by the run; never infer either from
an output folder or historical report. Do not renumber after filtering out
inapplicable rows.
Report <stable ID> (position <position>) — <row name>: <measured status>.
Historical IDs belong only in immutable receipts and historical
cross-references; they are not current progress identity. Preserve executable
IDs, historical outputs and checkpoint identity. A display change does not
trigger a rerun.
If the mapping is unavailable, report the step name and say numbering is not
yet verified rather than guessing. Applicability/PASS counts are separate
from the new step ID; never use a position as a completed-step count.
Purpose
DOCTRINE NOTE (2026-06-26 owner directive — STANDING preference; supersedes the 2026-06-17 PR-method). The maintainer now ships its OWN fixes by direct push to
main(direct commit +git push origin main, NOgh pr create— seevibe-ic:core-agent-loop§Step 3). The gatekeeper's gate SEQUENCE is unchanged and still authoritative — it is just applied PRE-PUSH on the main checkout (drivegatekeeper_review.pyto MERGE_OK → Step-2.7 on any guard/transform diff →gatekeeper_assign_version.py --write→git push) instead of on a PR branch. The PR-merge-queue machinery in this skill is RETAINED for any PR filed from ELSEWHERE (an external contributor, or a legacy in-flight branch): such a PR is still gated + version-assigned + squash-merged exactly as below. Doctrine history (so the flip-flop is legible): direct-push through v1.1.5 → PR-method 2026-06-17 → direct-push again 2026-06-26; the gates are retained in every era, only the landing ceremony changed.
What ships with it
3 files 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.
- today Changed · -24 lines · +132 tokens per session 6449a419c96c
- yesterday Changed · +17 lines fbb79f96d7bc
- 4d ago Changed · +18 lines 49b18766fe3c
- 1mo ago Changed · +6 lines f51701785f89
- 1mo ago First seen · 601 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 8c0d932d4e95
gatekeeper-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository vibeic/vibe-ic (28 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 132 tokens to every session and 8,885 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
mcore-split-pr
Split a PR into multiple PRs to reduce the number of required CODEOWNERS reviewer groups.
shiplog
Recap of everything shipped since the last run - cross-repo PRs, security fixes, star deltas, and X traction, synthesized into a digest article and a ready-to-post shiplog in your voice.
llxprt-issue-workflow
Use this skill when asked to address, fix, or work on a GitHub issue in the llxprt-code repository. Covers the complete issue lifecycle - branch setup, gh CLI usage, test-first planning, subagent delegation and review loops, the full verification cycle (including the zai-glm-flash smoke test), open code review (ocr)…
cuga-github-issues
Create GitHub issues for cuga-agent (bugs, features, epics, designs, and related work) against origin using gh, with epic → feature → issue hierarchy and GraphQL sub-issue linking, and the required design-impact and area labels. Use when the user says create new issues, report a bug, file a bug, feature request, new…
prepare
Draft release-preparation artefacts for : the planning issue, the version-bump and changelog prep PR (with the first-release review of what the source archive ships), the post-release dev-version bump PR, and, for ASF projects, the one-time automated-signing setup. Every output is a draft the RM confirms; nothing is…
artifact-metadata
Manage artifact metadata, versioning, ownership, and review history across the SDLC lifecycle.