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 vincentkoc/dotskills --skill semantic-slicinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vincentkoc/dotskillsWrote 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/vincentkoc/dotskills/semantic-slicing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vincentkoc/dotskills/semantic-slicing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vincentkoc/dotskills/semantic-slicing.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 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 Agent Snooping · line 83 Skill reads from agent configuration directories (.claude/, .codex/, .gemini/). These directories may contain API keys, personal settings, and other credentials that the skill has no legitimate need to access.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that access agent configuration directories (.claude/, .codex/, .gemini/). If configuration values are needed, pass them explicitly as parameters or environment variabl
- medium Rogue Agent · line 27 Skill establishes unauthorized persistence across sessions via cron jobs, startup scripts, or state files. Session persistence allows an attacker to maintain access beyond the current interaction.Fix: Remove any persistence mechanisms (cron jobs, startup scripts, state files). Skills should not maintain state across sessions without explicit user consent.
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 | $0.00043 | $0.01453 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00727 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00291 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00145 |
Grade A, and why
semantic-slicing 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 93 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Semantic Slicing
Purpose
Turn a large repo into reviewable semantic slices with evidence. Use code shape, threat candidates, issue clusters, and support chatter together so review budget lands on the right parts of the system.
Default stance: map locally first, rank second, spend agent/security-review budget last.
When to use
- Setting up or running
openclaw/clawpatchagainst a target repo. - Setting up or running
vercel-labs/deepsecagainst a target repo. - Producing a local visual map of feature slices, risky files, ownership clusters, or review targets.
- Cross-checking code slices against
gitcrawlissue/PR data ordiscrawlDiscord/support data. - Planning a focused security, regression, architecture, or maintainer-review pass for a large repo.
Workflow
- Create a scratch run directory outside the target checkout, usually
~/.semantic-slicing/<repo>/<timestamp>. - Read target repo instructions before scanning. For OpenClaw, read root
AGENTS.md; subtree guides matter when reviewing a slice. - Verify tool setup:
clawpatch: clone/buildopenclaw/clawpatch, then runclawpatch init,clawpatch map,clawpatch status.deepsec: clone/buildvercel-labs/deepsec, scaffold a scratch workspace, then rundeepsec scan.gitcrawl: rungitcrawl doctor --json, then pull clusters/threads for related issue evidence.discrawl: rundiscrawl doctor --jsonanddiscrawl status --json; use search/digest only when support chatter is relevant.
- Run deterministic maps before AI review:
- Clawpatch feature map for entrypoints/packages/config/test slices.
- Deepsec regex scan for candidate threat surfaces.
- Optional repo git overlay for CODEOWNERS routing, tracked files, code/test/doc shape, and recent churn.
- Optional gitcrawl/discrawl lookups for historical pain around the same files, components, or symptoms.
- Run
scripts/semantic-map.mjsto merge the local artifacts intosemantic-map.htmlandsemantic-map.json.- Sparse mode is on by default and omits dotfile/config trees, docs, changelog files, and mobile app trees so core review stays focused.
- Use
--no-sparseor--sparse falsefor the full repo; use--sparse-exclude <csv>and--sparse-include <csv>to tune the filter.
- Review the board in product order:
- review lanes first: semantic shape, ownership routing, development pressure, security pressure, issue pressure, support pressure,
- focus controls second: lens and system filters that narrow the matrix without duplicating rows,
- overall lens matrix third: the single slice-row table with comparable bars for semantic, ownership, development, security, issue, and support lenses,
- agent handoff packet fourth: compact JSON for follow-up agents,
- evidence tables last: raw-ish overlays for audit, not the primary reading path.
- Choose a cost size before running AI stages:
low: deterministic maps only; nodeepsec processor realclawpatch review.medium: one to three explicit files/features with high-risk slugs, batch size 1, concurrency 1, and a turn cap.high: broader AI processing or multiple feature reviews; requires an explicit budget/time decision.
- Run AI only at the chosen size:
clawpatch review --feature <id>or a small--limit.deepsec process --files <csv>or tightly scoped--filterplus--only-slugs.
- Report exact artifact paths, run IDs, counts, cost size, exclusions, and skipped expensive stages.
What ships with it
6 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.
- 8d ago First seen · 93 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 6db91d303477
semantic-slicing is a skill published in the GitHub repository vincentkoc/dotskills (102 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 1,453 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
taiyi-review
A pre-merge review guide for checking code changes, design decisions, tests, and documentation. A merge adds reviewed changes to the main code branch.
verify-implementation
A workflow that runs a project’s verification skills to produce a report on coding patterns, architecture rules, and project conventions. It is intended for work after implementation, before a pull request, or during code review.
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"…
frontend-code-review
Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., .tsx, .ts, .js). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules.
github-commenting
How to post clean, rich, deduplicated GitHub PR review comments — suggestion blocks, multi-line anchors, markers, formatting rules. Load before posting or fixing any PR comment.
repo-conventions
NeuroLink's review standards — the critical rules to enforce, what NOT to comment on, the security bar, hot paths. Load before reviewing any change in this repository.