Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp. 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/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/master/.github/Skills/issue-traceability-remediation/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcpWrote 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/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/issue-traceability-remediation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/issue-traceability-remediation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/issue-traceability-remediation/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/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/issue-traceability-remediation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/issue-traceability-remediation.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 | $0.00038 | $0.00968 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00484 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00194 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00097 |
Grade A, and why
issue-traceability-remediation 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 11d 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 — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Issue traceability remediation
Use this skill when
Use this skill when:
- an issue says backlog/open but code claims
@implements #N - README claims a feature is complete but issues list it as planned
- implementation comments reference issues/ADRs incorrectly
- broad REQ issues contain implementation progress, test status, and future work in one place
- labels, milestones, or trace links are missing or misleading
- an agent is about to implement directly from a broad issue without acceptance criteria
Goal
Make issue state, requirements, implementation, tests, and docs mutually consistent.
A future agent must be able to answer:
- What requirement exists?
- What design/ADR governs it?
- What code implements it?
- What tests verify it?
- What remains blocked, deferred, or unverified?
Required issue split
Do not allow one broad issue to carry all work states. Split into:
| Issue type | Purpose |
|---|---|
REQ-* |
Requirement: what must be true, with acceptance criteria. |
ADR-* |
Architectural decision: why this approach. |
IMP-* |
Implementation task: code change. |
TEST-* |
Verification task: unit/integration/HIL/probe validation. |
DOC-* |
Documentation update. |
PROBE-* |
Reverse-engineering or hardware probe task. |
BUG-* |
Defect against implemented behavior. |
Traceability syntax
Use exact, machine-readable links:
## Traceability
- Traces to: #123
- Depends on: #45
- Verifies: #67
- Implements: #89
For tests:
## Traceability
- Verifies: #123
For implementation PRs:
Fixes #123
Implements #456
Procedure
-
Inventory conflicting references.
- Search for
@implements #N,@architecture #N,Verifies: #N,Traces to: #N. - Compare against open/closed issue state.
- Identify features that are partly implemented but not verified.
- Search for
-
Classify issue state accurately.
implemented: code exists and tests pass.verified: code exists and suitable tests/HIL/probe evidence exist.partial: code exists but gaps remain.probe-blocked: implementation depends on hardware diff/probe.docs-drift: docs disagree with code/tests.planned: no implementation yet.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 119 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 5dbdfbb7893a
issue-traceability-remediation is a skill published in the GitHub repository zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp (1 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 968 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-review-triage
Watch open PRs, check CI status, review staleness, merge conflicts, and unanswered review comments. Produces a prioritized watchlist.
issue-creation
Trigger: issue creation, bug reports, feature requests, or issue approval. Create and triage GitHub issues from repository evidence.
sdd-tasks
Break an SDD change into implementation tasks. Trigger: orchestrator launches task planning for a change.
systemic-issue-triage
Trigger: new issue, bug report, triage, backlog, issue flood, community report, root cause, dead-end, blocked user. Attack issues by root class, never one-by-one; fixes must shrink the system, not grow it.
spec-kitty-runtime-review
Review runtime-owned outputs using the Spec Kitty review workflow surface, then direct approval or rejection with structured feedback. Triggers: "review this work package", "check runtime output", "approve this step", "review WP", "is this WP ready to approve", "check this implementation". Does NOT handle: setup-only…
tech-debt
Track, categorize, and prioritize technical debt across the codebase. Scans for debt indicators, maintains a debt register, and recommends repayment scheduling.