Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills/main/.codex/skills/claims-extractor/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skillsWrote 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/willoscar/research-units-pipeline-skills/claims-extractor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/willoscar/research-units-pipeline-skills/claims-extractor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/willoscar/research-units-pipeline-skills/claims-extractor/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/willoscar/research-units-pipeline-skills/claims-extractor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/willoscar/research-units-pipeline-skills/claims-extractor.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 | $0.00020 | $0.00420 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00210 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00084 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
claims-extractor 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
What ships with it
1 file 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 Changed · +3 lines · -122 tokens per session 090b94d400d4
- 12d ago First seen · 58 lines · 142 tokens per session scan A cbb5b7771fdf
claims-extractor is a skill published in the GitHub repository WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills (506 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 420 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
phase-8-review
Verify codebase quality — architecture consistency, convention compliance, gap analysis. Triggers: code review, architecture check, quality, gap analysis default: bkit:code-analyzer validate: bkit:design-validator gap: bkit:gap-detector qa: bkit:qa-strategist team: bkit:cto-lead.
code-review
Code review — analyze quality, detect bugs, ensure best practices with actionable feedback. Triggers: code review, quality check, bug detection.
code-changes
Change the user's own program, on their machine or through GitHub. Use when a request needs a change to the user's code (instrument tracing, wire the SDK, fix the agent behind a failing scenario, add a run parameter to a connected agent, version a hardcoded prompt) and not when the platform alone can do it (create a…
autonomous
Use when five specialized autonomous agents (code, deploy, planning, research, review) working as a coordinated pipeline. From spec to shipped code with automated planning, research, review, and deployment gates. Use when working with autonomous agents.
code-review-expert
Expert code review of current git changes with a senior engineer lens. Detects SOLID violations, security risks, and proposes actionable improvements.
brainstorm
Explores a codebase, researches the problem space, and produces an approved design specification before any code is written. Use when the user wants to create a new feature, add significant functionality, redesign a subsystem, or build something that touches multiple parts of the project.