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/warpdotdev/common-skills/write-feature-docsnpx skills add warpdotdev/common-skills --skill write-feature-docsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/warpdotdev/common-skillsWhat 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 | $0.00158 | $0.06608 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00079 | $0.03304 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00032 | $0.01322 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00661 |
Grade C, and why
write-feature-docs scanned grade C with 1 finding 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 2d 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.
Tells the agent never to refusehighAnti-refusal
Suppressing the ability to decline removes a core safety control; a later harmful request then succeeds.
The remaining gates in that reference are judgment calls about whether a change warrants docs. They govern the automated pipeline, not you — an engineer asking for docs on their own shipped feature has context the gate c How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 464 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
write-feature-docs
Draft a complete documentation page for a new Warp feature. You read the feature's spec, verify technical claims by researching the codebase yourself, confirm the content design plan and then the outline with the engineer, and only then produce a complete MDX draft and open a draft PR in warpdotdev/docs — tagging the docs team for review.
The engineer's job is to confirm what you couldn't verify from the spec and code — not to do a full accuracy review, not to polish prose, not to know docs conventions.
The workflow
- Find and read the spec files
- Research the codebase to verify technical claims — minimize what the engineer needs to check
- Present the content design plan and wait for confirmation — who the page is for
- Present the outline and wait for confirmation — what the page will contain
- Generate the complete MDX draft 5.5. Attempt screenshot capture via computer use (if available)
- Open a draft PR in
warpdotdev/docsand tag the docs team
Steps 3 and 4 are two separate confirmations, in that order. The outline is derived from the plan — the plan picks the content type, and the content type determines what sections the outline has. Presenting them together would show the engineer an outline built on an audience they have not agreed to yet, and they would anchor on the concrete outline instead of reconsidering the question above it. Settle who the page is for, then decide what goes in it.
Step 1: Find and read the spec
Ask the engineer for the spec ID if they haven't provided it. The spec ID is one of:
- A Linear ticket number:
APP-1234,REMOTE-1234,QUALITY-408 - A GitHub issue (prefixed with
gh-):gh-4567 - A short kebab-case feature name:
vertical-tabs-hover-sidecar
Look for the spec files at:
specs/<id>/PRODUCT.md— primary source: user-facing behavior, what and whyspecs/<id>/TECH.md— secondary source: implementation, data model
Read both files if both exist. PRODUCT.md is the primary driver for the docs content.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 464 lines · 158 tokens per session scan C 2a5a5de2943a
write-feature-docs is a skill published in the GitHub repository warpdotdev/common-skills (413 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 158 tokens to every session and 6,608 once invoked, about $0.0008 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it C with 1 finding (tells the agent never to refuse). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
agent-host-chat-contributions
Build and review cross-cutting agent-host chat behavior through lifecycle contributions. Use when adding turn lifecycle side effects, prompt or context injection, restored-history transformation, protocol-action observation, or when reviewing changes that add code to AgentSideEffects or AgentService.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.