Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zuoyebang/aiweavenpx agentmods add skills/zuoyebang/aiweave/new-controllerWrote 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/zuoyebang/aiweave/new-controller)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zuoyebang/aiweave/new-controller"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zuoyebang/aiweave/new-controller/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/zuoyebang/aiweave/new-controller"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zuoyebang/aiweave/new-controller.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 | $0.00028 | $0.01061 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00424 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00212 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
new-controller 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 1mo 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.
根据 $ARGUMENTS 生成 Controller handler 文件。
公共步骤模板见 skills-spec/01_skill_authoring_guide.md §A-§E。本 Skill 特定内容如下。
第 0 步:拒绝规则与依赖前置
- ⛔ 拒绝(§A.1):路径命中
BUILD_STATUS.md§0 中 🚫 模块路径(如admin/{disabled-module}/*)时立即拒绝 - 状态检查(§A.2):读
BUILD_STATUS.md§5 路由组状态 - 依赖(§A.3):
- 对应 service 未实现 → 先调
/new-service生成 - Internal 路由组首次生成时,先检查共享文件:
controllers/http/internal/render.go(renderInternalResponse)+validator.go,缺失则按docs/architecture/render_functions.md生成
- 对应 service 未实现 → 先调
第 1 步:读取设计文档(公共必读见 §B)
- 主文档:
docs/api/{audience}_interfaces.md - 额外必读:
docs/architecture/routing.md§4、docs/service/service_design.md(确认 service 方法签名)
第 2 步:选择响应模板
Internal 控制器模板(与外部协议对齐的响应格式)
package {module}
import (
"{project}/components"
"{project}/pkg/gin"
"{project}/service/{service_module}"
)
type {Action}Req struct {
Field1 string `json:"field1" binding:"required,max=64"`
}
var {svcVar} = &{service_module}.{Service}Service{}
func {Action}(ctx *gin.Context) {
var req {Action}Req
if err := ctx.ShouldBindJSON(&req); err != nil {
renderInternalResponse(ctx, components.NewServiceError({N}, "请求参数错误"), nil)
return
}
resp, err := {svcVar}.{Method}(ctx, &req)
renderInternalResponse(ctx, err, resp)
}
UserSelf / Admin 控制器模板(标准 errNo/errStr 响应格式)
package {module}
import (
"{project}/components"
"{project}/pkg/gin"
"{project}/pkg/golib/v2/base"
"{project}/service/{service_module}"
)
type {Action}Req struct {
Field1 string `json:"field1" binding:"required,max=64"`
}
var {svcVar} = &{service_module}.{Service}Service{}
func {Action}(ctx *gin.Context) {
var req {Action}Req
if err := ctx.ShouldBindJSON(&req); err != nil { // GET 用 ShouldBindQuery
base.RenderJsonFail(ctx, components.ErrorParamInvalid)
return
}
resp, err := {svcVar}.{Method}(ctx, &req)
if err != nil {
base.RenderJsonFail(ctx, err)
return
}
base.RenderJsonSucc(ctx, resp)
}
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 119 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A a23bbdeb40e4
new-controller is a skill published in the GitHub repository zuoyebang/aiweave (20 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 1,061 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
build-teaql-app
Build or change a TeaQL application in Java, Rust, Go, Swift, Python, C#/.NET, or TypeScript, including Kotlin/JVM applications that consume Java-generated libraries. Mandatory order: first draft and save a complete KSML model, then verify the client and evaluate that saved model, repair it through repeated evaluation…
compact-error-handling
Reduce repeated exception-handling code with language-appropriate constructs while preserving error propagation and diagnostics.
api-runtime-verify
Verify a built backend HTTP surface at runtime: per route, record the response, assert it against the slice's acceptance behavior, and decide PASS/FAIL/BLOCKED. Do not use to review a contract before implementation (use api-contract-review or graphql-contract-review), write code (use implement-approved-slice), triage…
api-contract-review
Review an API contract (shapes, errors, auth model) BEFORE implementation for naming, versioning, pagination, idempotency, and fit with existing endpoints. Use when designing or changing endpoints. Do not use when the API is already implemented (use review-hard or repo-consistency-sweep).
backend-system-design
Produce a staff-grade backend system-design RFC: a 12-section document for a new service, endpoint, or feature. Composes with slo-define, performance-budget, api-contract-review, release-plan. Use when a backend feature needs architecture-level design before planning. Do not use to slice a designed change (use…
graphql-contract-review
Review a GraphQL schema and a Backend-for-Frontend (BFF) contract BEFORE implementation against a GraphQL checklist (nullability, N+1, cost limits, federation, BFF thinness). Use when designing or modifying a GraphQL schema, a federated subgraph, or a BFF contract. Do not use for a REST contract (use…