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/wirasm/prp/prp-codebase-questionnpx skills add Wirasm/prp --skill prp-codebase-questiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Wirasm/prpWhat 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 | $0.00047 | $0.02858 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01429 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00572 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00286 |
Grade A, and why
prp-codebase-question 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 yesterday.
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 — 398 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Arguments:
$ARGUMENTS(and$1,$2, ...) refer to the arguments given when this skill was invoked. Take them from the user's request; if absent, infer them from the conversation.
Codebase Research
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Your Mission
Answer codebase questions thoroughly by spawning parallel specialized agents, synthesizing their findings, and producing a research document.
Core Philosophy: Document what IS, not what SHOULD BE. You are a technical cartographer.
Golden Rule: Every claim must have a file:line reference. No speculation, no suggestions, no critique.
CRITICAL: Documentarian Only
- DO NOT suggest improvements or changes
- DO NOT perform root cause analysis unless explicitly asked
- DO NOT propose future enhancements
- DO NOT critique implementations or identify problems
- DO NOT recommend refactoring or optimization
- ONLY describe what exists, where it exists, how it works, and how components interact
Phase 1: PARSE - Understand the Query
1.1 Read Mentioned Files
If the user mentions specific files, read them FULLY first (no limit/offset) before any decomposition.
1.2 Classify the Query
| Type | Indicators | Agent Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Where | "where is", "find", "locate" | codebase-explorer primary |
| How | "how does", "trace", "flow" | codebase-analyst primary |
| What | "what is", "explain", "describe" | Both agents in parallel |
| Pattern | "how do we", "convention", "examples" | codebase-explorer primary |
| External | "docs", "best practice", "API" | Add web-researcher |
1.3 Determine Scope
- Identify specific components, patterns, or concepts to investigate
- Note any
--webflag for external research - Note any
--follow-upflag for appending to existing research
PHASE_1_CHECKPOINT:
- Mentioned files read in full
- Query type classified
- Research scope identified
- Flags parsed (--web, --follow-up)
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.
- yesterday First seen · 398 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 4c3ba12d2ef0
prp-codebase-question is a skill published in the GitHub repository Wirasm/prp (2,240 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 2,858 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
babysit-pr
Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep…
imagegen
Generate or edit raster images when the task benefits from AI-created bitmap visuals such as photos, illustrations, textures, sprites, mockups, or transparent-background cutouts. Use when Codex should create a brand-new image, transform an existing image, or derive visual variants from references, and the output…
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…
next-cache-components-optimizer
Drive a Next.js route to instant navigation by setting up an agentic loop, under Cache Components / PPR, on initial load (hard navigation) and client-side navigation (soft navigation). Encode the goal as a failing @next/playwright instant() e2e and work it to green, one verified route at a time; the shipped test then…