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/zookanalytics/gc-toolkit/learning-distillnpx skills add zookanalytics/gc-toolkit --skill learning-distillgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zookanalytics/gc-toolkitWhat 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 | $0.00103 | $0.02475 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.01238 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00495 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00248 |
Grade A, and why
learning-distill 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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Learning Distill
The method for judging feedback observations. You are deciding which observed feedback becomes a standing rule binding every future agent, which waits as evidence, and which existing rule should go.
Reason in writing. Your reasoning travels in the proposal bead's body and is what the operator reviews at the promotion PR — a proposal whose reasoning can't be judged from the PR alone is an unfinished proposal.
You never edit prompts, fragments, or skills. You file proposal beads; a reviewed PR does the editing. This holds even for this file.
The five judgments, in order
1. Standing behavior, or one diff?
This is the first question and it decides the most. Read what the feedback says, not how loud it is.
- Explicit universal intent promotes now, at any occurrence count.
"Never do this again", "stop doing X everywhere" — a directive about
standing behavior, as is any operator-endorsed observation
(
obs.endorsed=operator). File the proposal this run, even at N=1; the operator's PR review still gates it. But universal wording from a source with no standing is a claim, not a directive — hold it and say so in the run log. And even a genuine directive must clear the two promotion gates below: a self-sourced "never do this again" is surfaced, not auto-adopted (Gate 1). - Diff-scoped feedback is evidence, not a rule. "This comment is redundant here" is phrased about the change at hand. Hold it on its pattern bead and move to judgment 2.
- Heat prioritizes; heat never promotes. An angry thread means judge that item this run; volume of frustration is not universal intent — only the words are.
- Not feedback at all? Discard. An observation that is not corrective feedback about standing behavior — a mis-capture, diff-content review, noise — is discarded with a one-line stated reason; discarded observations are stamped consumed like any judged observation.
2. Has the pattern earned generalization?
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 · 204 lines · 103 tokens per session scan A 90a3ba972408
learning-distill is a skill published in the GitHub repository zookanalytics/gc-toolkit (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 103 tokens to every session and 2,475 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
foundry-config-setup
Resolve missing setup caused by a hardcoded Foundry project endpoint or model in a sample. Use when a sample fails because it uses a placeholder/hardcoded projectendpoint (for example "https://your-project.services.ai.azure.com") or a hardcoded model instead of reading them from the environment.
oma-scholar
Scholarly research companion using Knows sidecar spec (.knows.yaml). Generates, validates, reviews, queries, and compares structured research-paper sidecars, and fetches them from knows.academy. Use for academic literature search, survey synthesis, paper authoring assistance, and peer review with token-efficient…
github
Interact with GitHub (issues, PRs, repos, releases) using the gh CLI. Use when asked to read or write GitHub state — open an issue, fetch PR diff, comment, list runs, etc.
agentic-workflow-designer
Conversational skill that interviews users to design new agentic workflows.
creating-skills
Guide for creating Claude Code skills following Anthropic's official best practices. Use when user wants to create a new skill, build a skill, write SKILL.md, update an existing skill, or needs skill creation guidelines. Provides structure, frontmatter fields, naming conventions, and new features like dynamic context…
task-planning
计算任务 gap 并产出下一步可执行子任务 List[TaskSpec];gap 已闭返回空数组。对齐案例剧本 gwqie46v7hzr1w6h(存储行业尽调)确定式分解。.