Gajae Code is an external coding-agent harness that works inside repositories or worktrees and guides an agent through planning, review, approval, and code changes. It is for developers who want to use an existing coding-plan subscription while controlling agent work from a terminal, phone, or bot. The catalogue entries provide extensions such as skills, agents, commands, plugins, and MCP integrations for the harness.
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 Yeachan-Heo/gajae-code --skill deep-interviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Yeachan-Heo/gajae-codeWrote 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/yeachan-heo/gajae-code/deep-interview)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yeachan-heo/gajae-code/deep-interview"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yeachan-heo/gajae-code/deep-interview/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/yeachan-heo/gajae-code/deep-interview"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yeachan-heo/gajae-code/deep-interview.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 4 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Rogue Agent · line 39 Skill establishes unauthorized persistence across sessions via cron jobs, startup scripts, or state files. Session persistence allows an attacker to maintain access beyond the current interaction.Fix: Remove any persistence mechanisms (cron jobs, startup scripts, state files). Skills should not maintain state across sessions without explicit user consent.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 383 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 623 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 649 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00016 | $0.22614 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.09046 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.04523 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.02261 |
Grade A, and why
deep-interview 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 18d 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 — 1,117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<Purpose_And_Principles> DIPP-1 — Purpose. Deep Interview applies Socratic questioning with mathematical ambiguity scoring to replace vague ideas with crystal-clear specifications: it exposes hidden assumptions, measures clarity across weighted dimensions, and refuses to proceed until ambiguity drops below the resolved threshold for this run. The output feeds into a gated pipeline: deep-interview → ralplan consensus refinement → pending approval → explicitly approved execution, ensuring maximum clarity before any mutation starts. AI can build anything. The hard part is knowing what to build. GJC planning Phase 0 expands ideas into specs via analyst + architect, but this single-pass approach struggles with genuinely vague inputs: it asks "what do you want?" instead of "what are you assuming?" Deep Interview iteratively exposes assumptions and mathematically gates readiness, ensuring the AI has genuine clarity before spending execution cycles. Inspired by the Ouroboros project, which demonstrated that specification quality is the primary bottleneck in AI-assisted development.
DIPP-2 — Use when.
Use when the user wants requirements clarified before execution: a vague or exploratory idea ("I have a vague idea", "not sure exactly what I want"); an explicit request to interview ("deep interview", "interview me", "ask me everything", "don't assume", "make sure you understand", "socratic"); a wish to avoid "that's not what I meant" outcomes from autonomous execution or to reach mathematically-validated clarity before committing to execution; a task complex enough that jumping to code would waste cycles on scope discovery; an implementation ask whose target, scope, acceptance criteria, or safety boundary is ambiguous enough that mutation would require guessing; or an explicit deep-interview request even after being told the request is already clear.
- User requests a trace/research pre-step before the interview, e.g.
/skill:deep-interview --trace <idea>
DIPP-3 — Question pacing.
- Ask ONE question at a time -- never batch multiple questions
DIPP-4 — Language.
- Default to English when no language preference is explicit or obvious. Preserve the user/session language for every user-facing announcement, topology confirmation, option label, and interview question when state includes
language.instruction; do not add language-specific special cases
DIPP-5 — Self-proofread.
- Before emitting any user-facing natural-language prose governed by
language.instruction, perform one silent, best-effort self-proofread in the preserved session language for obvious spelling, spacing, grammar, inflection/particle, and word-choice errors, using the same language-agnostic pass for whatever language is active rather than special-casing any single language. Apply it only to newly generated prose and never announce the proofreading, show before/after text, apologize for it, or re-emit a corrected copy. Do not alter code blocks or identifiers, file paths, CLI commands, JSON/configuration keys,askmetadata keys, table/round structure, fixed labels, numeric scores, component ids, status tokens, user quotes or source text, Phase 0 threshold markers such asDeep Interview threshold: <resolvedThresholdPercent> (source: <resolvedThresholdSource>), or fixed paths such as.gjc/_session-{sessionid}/specs/deep-interview-{slug}.md; still apply the self-proofread to generated natural-language clauses or cells inside those structures, including Why now rationale, gap text, next-target phrasing, and coverage notes
DIPP-6 — Weakest dimension.
- Target the WEAKEST clarity dimension with each question. Make weakest-dimension targeting explicit every round: name the weakest dimension, state its score/gap, and explain why the next question is aimed there
DIPP-7 — Prompt budget.
Keep prompt payloads budgeted: summarize or trim oversized initial context/history before composing question, scoring, spec, or handoff prompts. If the user's initial context is oversized or likely to crowd out downstream prompts, create a concise prompt-safe summary first — one that preserves user intent, decisions, constraints, unknowns, cited files/symbols, and any explicit non-goals — and wait until that summary exists before ambiguity scoring, weakest-dimension selection, question generation, brownfield exploration prompts, spec crystallization, or any downstream execution handoff (bridge to
ralplanorultragoal).
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 18d ago Changed · +95 lines 9ffc9d2ec860
- 24d ago Changed b5955e179215
- 1mo ago Changed 393cfea2d619
- 1mo ago First seen · 1,022 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 43ecbc6e53ab
deep-interview is a skill published in the GitHub repository Yeachan-Heo/gajae-code (3,026 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 22,614 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
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
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…
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…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…