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-issuenpx skills add Wirasm/prp --skill prp-issuegit 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 | $0.00097 | $0.01226 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00048 | $0.00613 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00245 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00123 |
Grade A, and why
prp-issue 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 3d 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 — 64 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.
Deliver One Workstream
Own planning through PR and every correction in this context. Preserve accumulated reasoning across that implementation lifecycle; use fresh contexts only where independence is the feature—review.
Input: $ARGUMENTS (if absent, use the conversation).
Contract
- Continue autonomously through plan, implementation, PR, review, correction, re-review, and CI.
- Compose
$prp-plan,$prp-implement, and$prp-review; do not reproduce their craft. - Keep the plan, implementation report, PR, review report, publication URL, validation, and CI as the workstream's proof. Never reduce a handoff to a private summary.
- Stop only for a product decision, missing prerequisite primitive, inaccessible dependency, permission boundary, or repeated no-progress failure that cannot be resolved in this context.
- Do not merge. The caller or outer orchestrator owns that gate.
1. Resolve and plan in this context
Accept an issue or tracker URL, PRD, document, existing .plan.md, free-form request, conversation context, or reviewed PR.
- Review-only request or contributor PR: use
$prp-reviewand stop. - Existing plan: use it; publish it first with
$prp-plan publish <path>when issue-derived publication is missing. - Issue with a published plan: let
$prp-implementresolve and persist its absolute path from source metadata. - Existing reviewed PR: resolve its plan and implementation report, then resume correction or verification without repeating completed work.
- Every other input: invoke
$prp-plannow in this context. Keep its reasoning available for implementation.
Require the absolute plan path and, for issue-derived plans, the verified publication URL before review.
2. Implement through PR in this context
Invoke $prp-implement with the plan path—or source issue when resolving a published plan—and any explicit base. Keep ownership in this context through validation, scoped commit, PR creation, linked PRD updates, and the implementation report.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 64 lines · 97 tokens per session scan A 2db7dce61efb
prp-issue is a skill published in the GitHub repository Wirasm/prp (2,240 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 97 tokens to every session and 1,226 once invoked, about $0.0005 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.
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.
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.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
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…