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 wunki/dotfiles --skill bettergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wunki/dotfilesWrote 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/wunki/dotfiles/better)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wunki/dotfiles/better"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wunki/dotfiles/better/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/wunki/dotfiles/better"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wunki/dotfiles/better.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00414 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00166 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00083 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
better 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to better — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
I want a deeper version of this task, not a bigger one. Before rewriting it: (1) say what a top professional in this field would do here that I'm not asking for; (2) name the rawest material they would start from instead of what has already been digested for me; (3) name the specific methods and tools they would use; (4) say what, other than you or me, would show the result is right. Then rewrite my prompt to ask for exactly that.
How to apply it
First decide which case you are in.
Case A: the user gave you a prompt to improve. The text with the command is a prompt or task they have not started yet. Give your answers to (1) to (4), then the rewritten prompt. Do not carry the prompt out.
Case B: work is already in progress. The command came alone, or with feedback on work you have already done in this conversation ("not good enough", "too shallow"). "This task" is that work, and the feedback is part of the task.
- Give your answers to (1) to (4) for that task, in a few lines each.
- Rewrite the task's brief: the original request plus the user's feedback, deepened by your answers.
- Decide whether to pause. If the new brief changes the goal, widens the scope, or needs a decision, money or access that only the user can give, show it and wait for their go-ahead. Otherwise carry on.
- Do the work again to the new brief. Start from the raw material in your answer to (2), use the methods and tools in your answer to (3), and before you report, run the check in your answer to (4) and say what it showed.
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 · 20 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 72bae97a7f43
better is a skill published in the GitHub repository wunki/dotfiles (47 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 414 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to better, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
assess-quality
Foundational quality framework: the five questions (readable, easy to start, expands without bloat, consistent, intentional) every other dev skill is judged against, plus the dual-audience and workshop principles. Use when onboarding to a project, defining a quality bar, setting an assessment checklist, or arbitrating…
create-oss-skill
Create well-formed Agent Skills following the agentskills.io specification. Scaffold directories, write SKILL.md files, bundle scripts, and structure instructions for progressive disclosure. Use when creating a new skill, reviewing skill structure, optimizing a skill description, or setting up evals for skill quality.
orchestrate-agents
Orchestrate multiple agent CLIs (Claude, Codex, Antigravity) via tmux with a shared fleet store, dispatching one guardian subagent per pane. Survey-first: inspects and adopts existing tmux sessions, windows, and agent panes before creating anything new. Use when running a multi-agent session, dispatching parallel…
scaffold-project
Generates cross-language standard files (README, AGENTS.md, LICENSE, CONTRIBUTING.md, SECURITY.md, sr.yaml, .envrc, llms.txt), documentation conventions, and project structure, then dispatches to language-specific scaffolds. Use first for cross-language standard files and structure, THEN load the matching scaffold…
test-code
Testing philosophy, test types (unit, integration, golden, fuzz, property, benchmark, smoke, E2E), per-language conventions (Rust, Go, Python, TypeScript), file organization, fixtures/mocks, CI strategy, and what NOT to test. Use when writing tests, reviewing test coverage, setting up test infrastructure, or deciding…
extend-oss-skills-to-claude
Extend standard agentskills.io skills with Claude Code-specific features. Invocation control, subagent execution, dynamic context injection, string substitutions, model/effort overrides, and deployment scoping. Use when adapting a portable skill for Claude Code, adding Claude-specific frontmatter, setting up subagent…