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 wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-control --skill parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-controlWrote 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/wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-control/parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-control/parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-control/parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-check/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/wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-control/parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-control/parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-check.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 | $0.00384 | $0.03607 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00192 | $0.01803 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00077 | $0.00721 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00038 | $0.00361 |
Grade A, and why
parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-check 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 — 285 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pre-Tiebreaker Delta Check on Scope-Overlapping Parallel PRs
Problem
Two parallel sessions independently opened PRs targeting the same issue (same fix scope, same files, same goal). A session-handoff prompt later asks a third session to pick a winner. The prompt's recommended tiebreaker is some combination of:
- "Merge the first-mover" (older PR by createdAt)
- "Merge the one that's clean against main" (mergeable: CLEAN, no rebase needed)
- "Merge the one with reviewer APPROVE" (assumed implies higher quality)
- "Merge the one with wider scope" (e.g., bundles verification + handoff doc)
These rules are about merge mechanics, not implementation quality. They can — and do — ship the inferior PR while the better implementation gets closed.
Trigger Conditions
ALL of the following must hold:
- Two parallel PRs are open simultaneously, targeting overlapping scope
(same issue number cited as
Closes #N; same files touched; same fix intent). - A session-handoff prompt explicitly suggests a tiebreaker default ("merge #X because it's first-mover", "clean against main", "wider scope"), or you're operating from such instructions in auto-mode.
- The two PRs were authored by different sessions (different worktrees,
different branches, different timestamps, different commit authors or
different
co-authored-bychains). - You haven't yet run
gh pr diff <A>andgh pr diff <B>side-by-side to compare implementations.
If those conditions hold and you're about to merge based on the prompt's recommendation alone, STOP — run the delta check first.
Solution
Step 1 — Refresh both PR snapshots
A prompt authored hours ago may cite stale state (e.g., "PR #X is CLEAN, PR #Y is CONFLICTING"). Main may have advanced; the relative state often flips by the time the next session runs.
gh pr view <A> --json state,mergeable,mergeStateStatus,statusCheckRollup,additions,deletions,createdAt,headRefName
gh pr view <B> --json state,mergeable,mergeStateStatus,statusCheckRollup,additions,deletions,createdAt,headRefName
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 · 285 lines · 384 tokens per session scan A 03acd60927d3
parallel-pr-scope-overlap-tiebreaker-delta-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository wan-huiyan/agent-traffic-control (3 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 384 tokens to every session and 3,607 once invoked, about $0.0019 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
pr-check
PR review compliance: fetch review comments from an open PR, categorize as resolved/unresolved/dismissed, critically evaluate fixable items, implement approved fixes, and reply inline. Pass --unattended to halt on human-judgment items (emitted as Pending-Human) instead of prompting via AskUserQuestion.
babysit
PR babysitter: monitors CI status, auto-rebases when behind, auto-fixes CI where possible, delegates review comment handling to dlc:pr-check, and re-requests review after fixes. Designed for /loop usage with Remote Control.
git-ops
Git hygiene: clean up merged branches, prune stale remotes, and verify repository state.
misuzu
Respond to PR review comments semi-automatically. Fetches all review threads and comments, splits them into logical units, fixes and commits one unit at a time, then replies and resolves review threads. Use when the user wants to address PR review feedback or respond to review comments.
pr-style
Pull request style guidelines covering title, body, assignee, and label selection. Use when writing or proposing GitHub pull requests, including direct gh pr create invocations outside the /pr skill.
swarm-pi-review
Review a Git working tree or branch with read-only Pi workers. Use standard for bugs, security, regressions, and missing tests; use lean for diff-bound simplification, deletion, reuse, YAGNI, or native replacements. Route one question to ask and broader risk analysis to orchestrate.