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 wei63w/pm-manager --skill pm-checkupgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wei63w/pm-managerWrote 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/wei63w/pm-manager/pm-checkup)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wei63w/pm-manager/pm-checkup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wei63w/pm-manager/pm-checkup/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/wei63w/pm-manager/pm-checkup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wei63w/pm-manager/pm-checkup.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00034 | $0.00346 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00138 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00069 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00035 |
Grade A, and why
pm-checkup 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
Accepted: empty | --module <name>.
Outline
/pm-checkup 是按需全量体检，不是日常口令，也不是 /pm-all 默认步骤。用户以中文交互时用中文回复。不启动定时器。未确认不改业务代码。
- Require
.pm/。缺则建议/pm-init。 - 先读
map.json、doc-index.md、rules.md。禁止无过滤全库递归。 - 运行
pm checkup（或--module）。打开.pm/state/checkup.md。 - P0 置顶打断；P1/P2 只汇总。可建议
/pm-review把 P0 收成带推理的评审行。 - Closing：
_closing.md完整档，只链已有 checkup / overview。
Done When
- 五维报告已刷新
- 未把体检绑进日常 status 默认深潜
- 无秘密原文落盘
Shared Workflow
Map-first. Redact. Confirm-before-write. Design baseline: docs/prd.md + 宪章。
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 38 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 1e4d64bb3e1c
pm-checkup is a skill published in the GitHub repository wei63w/pm-manager (87 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 346 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
doubt-driven-development
Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands. Use when you want every assumption cross-examined before proceeding, when stress-testing a plan for hidden failure modes, when correctness matters more than speed, when working in unfamiliar code, when stakes are high…
performance-optimization
Optimizes application performance across frontend, backend, queries, and databases. Use when performance requirements exist, when you suspect performance regressions, when Core Web Vitals or load times need improvement, when N+1 query patterns need fixing, or when profiling reveals bottlenecks.
debugging-and-error-recovery
Guides systematic root-cause debugging. Use when tests fail, builds break, something that worked yesterday broke, behavior doesn't match expectations, or you encounter any unexpected error. Use when you need to figure out what broke and why — a systematic approach to finding and fixing the root cause rather than…
systematic-debugging
A step-by-step method for finding the underlying cause of technical problems before changing code. It covers reading errors, reproducing failures, checking recent changes, and tracing data across system components.
diagnosing-superpowers
A diagnostic workflow for investigating problems in Superpowers agent sessions using saved conversation records. It requires evidence linked to exact file paths and line numbers, then organizes findings into a report.
browser-trace
Capture a full DevTools-protocol trace of any browser automation — CDP firehose, screenshots, and DOM dumps — then bisect the stream into per-page searchable buckets. Use when the user wants to debug a failed run, audit network/console/DOM activity, attach a trace to an in-progress session, or feed structured per-page…