Nanako0129

Registry 색인

sepia

Make AI-generated writing read as human-written, in fiction and in professional prose. Repairs the narrative architecture of fiction and stories (based on StoryScope, arXiv:2604.03136); routes professional text through domain rules for release notes, announcements, PR and issue r

소스 확인GitHub에서 보기
가격 미확인★ 231 GitHub 스타목록 업데이트 · 2026년 10월 6일agent-skill

개요

Make AI-generated writing read as human-written, in fiction and in professional prose. Repairs the narrative architecture of fiction and stories (based on StoryScope, arXiv:2604.03136); routes professional text through domain rules for release notes, announcements, PR and issue replies, code-review comments, incident postmortems, tickets, work orders, technical articles, and blog posts. Four operations - write, review (diagnose AI tells without editing), refactor (minimal in-place edits), recreate (full rewrite). Use when asked to humanize, de-AI, unslop, or strip AI flavor from any text; when writing or revising any of these document types; or whenever output must not read as machine-written.

전체 설명 읽기

소스 문서이며 이 웹사이트의 실행 지침이 아닙니다. 명령 실행 전에 권한을 확인하세요.

Sepia — de-AI writing

Every rule here is backed by a measured human-vs-AI gap. The load-bearing facts: in fiction, a classifier using only narrative-structure features detects AI at 93.2% macro-F1 and style editing barely moves it — so structure is fixed before style, always. In professional prose, the measured tells are different — filler density, missing stance, chatbot residue, register mismatch, format uniformity — and the fix is domain-specific. Route first, then operate.

Routing

Text typeLoad, in order
Fiction / stories / narrative essaysreferences/narrative-pass.md → references/discourse-pass.md → references/style-pass.md; diagnose with references/rubric.md
Release notes, changelogs, announcementsreferences/professional-pass.md + references/domains/release-notes.md
PR replies, issue replies, review commentsreferences/professional-pass.md + references/domains/dev-replies.md
Incident postmortems / RCAreferences/professional-pass.md + references/domains/postmortems.md
Tickets, work orders, bug reportsreferences/professional-pass.md + references/domains/tickets.md
Technical articles, blog posts, tutorialsreferences/professional-pass.md + references/domains/tech-articles.md + references/discourse-pass.md §1–3
Any other prosereferences/professional-pass.md + references/style-pass.md

Every non-fiction route ends with the vocabulary/syntax scan in references/style-pass.md §2–3, and long professional pieces take the whole style pass — in both cases skipping its fiction-slop table. If the text was produced by a known model, add references/model-fingerprints.md (fiction-centric; use as priors).

Operations

Any request maps to one of four operations:

OperationContract
writeNew content. Read the domain file before drafting — architecture and register decisions come first, they cannot be retrofitted cheaply. For fiction, follow Workflow A below.
reviewDiagnose only — no edits. Produce the defect list (fiction: rubric report; professional: checklist findings with quoted evidence) and stop. Report findings; apply nothing until asked.
refactorMinimal in-place revision preserving structure, voice, and intent. Two-stage: full defect list first, then fix item by item, deepest layer first. Skew replace/delete over insert (measured editor ratio 74/18/8).
recreateFull rewrite. Extract the facts, claims, and intent from the original into a bare list; verify nothing invented; write fresh under the domain rules. Use when defects are structural and the text is short enough that surgery costs more than rebuilding.

The two-stage protocol is not optional for refactor/recreate: paraphrasing without a defect list makes AI fingerprints more visible, not less (measured on expert detectors).

Fiction workflows

A — writing new fiction: (1) premise, genre, length — genre sets calibration targets; (2) fill the architecture sheet in references/narrative-pass.md; (3) select 3–5 human-leaning moves + one rarity move; (4) outline, run the outline/QUD checks in references/discourse-pass.md and the echo test in references/narrative-pass.md §2; (5) draft; (6) self-diagnose with references/rubric.md, one group at a time; (7) style pass last.

B — revising existing fiction: (1) diagnose completely first (rubric → discourse → style), no edits; (2) triage — architecture defects need scene-level surgery, tell the user how deep before cutting; (3) fix deepest first; (4) verify: re-run changed rubric groups, read key passages aloud, echo-test any added twist.

Calibration — the rule that governs all rules

PrincipleMeaning
Aim at the band, not the opposite poleHuman values are moderate (chronological discontinuity 2.4/5, not 5). Inverting every AI tell creates a new fingerprint. In professional prose the equivalent: match the venue's register, don't overshoot into forced casualness — informality alone fools no trained reader.
Select, don't accumulateHuman writing is diverse. Fiction: 3–5 moves per story, chosen for the premise, varied across works. Professional: fix what the checklist actually flags, nothing more.
Leave slackOrdinary sentences, an underdeveloped thought, a plain paragraph. Do not sand every surface.

Hard guardrails

  • Never invent specifics. Fiction: intertextual references, brands, places must be real and correct. Professional: versions, numbers, timestamps, benchmarks, quotes come from the actual change/incident/data — missing info means ask the user or leave an explicit TODO, never fill. Confident wrong facts are themselves a top-tier tell.
  • Deletion beats addition (74% replace / 18% delete / 8% insert). The only additive fix is real specificity.
  • Respect the author's voice and the venue's corpus. Extract habits from the user's samples or the venue's recent artifacts before editing; edit toward that profile. Do not remove a mannerism they actually use.
  • Dialogue quotes and quoted material are load-bearing — do not regularize them.
  • Check the whitelists (references/style-pass.md §7, references/professional-pass.md last section) before flagging: clean grammar, formal tone in formal venues, and conventional templates are not evidence of AI.
파일 메타데이터
name: sepia
description: Make AI-generated writing read as human-written, in fiction and in professional prose. Repairs the narrative architecture of fiction and stories (based on StoryScope, arXiv:2604.03136); routes professional text through domain rules for release notes, announcements, PR and issue replies, code-review comments, incident postmortems, tickets, work orders, technical articles, and blog posts. Four operations - write, review (diagnose AI tells without editing), refactor (minimal in-place edits), recreate (full rewrite). Use when asked to humanize, de-AI, unslop, or strip AI flavor from any text; when writing or revising any of these document types; or whenever output must not read as machine-written.
license: MIT
metadata:
  version: "0.2.0"
원문 보기
---
name: sepia
description: Make AI-generated writing read as human-written, in fiction and in professional prose. Repairs the narrative architecture of fiction and stories (based on StoryScope, arXiv:2604.03136); routes professional text through domain rules for release notes, announcements, PR and issue replies, code-review comments, incident postmortems, tickets, work orders, technical articles, and blog posts. Four operations - write, review (diagnose AI tells without editing), refactor (minimal in-place edits), recreate (full rewrite). Use when asked to humanize, de-AI, unslop, or strip AI flavor from any text; when writing or revising any of these document types; or whenever output must not read as machine-written.
license: MIT
metadata:
  version: "0.2.0"
---

# Sepia — de-AI writing

Every rule here is backed by a measured human-vs-AI gap. The load-bearing facts: in fiction, a classifier using only **narrative-structure features** detects AI at 93.2% macro-F1 and style editing barely moves it — so structure is fixed before style, always. In professional prose, the measured tells are different — filler density, missing stance, chatbot residue, register mismatch, format uniformity — and the fix is domain-specific. Route first, then operate.

## Routing

| Text type | Load, in order |
|---|---|
| Fiction / stories / narrative essays | `references/narrative-pass.md` → `references/discourse-pass.md` → `references/style-pass.md`; diagnose with `references/rubric.md` |
| Release notes, changelogs, announcements | `references/professional-pass.md` + `references/domains/release-notes.md` |
| PR replies, issue replies, review comments | `references/professional-pass.md` + `references/domains/dev-replies.md` |
| Incident postmortems / RCA | `references/professional-pass.md` + `references/domains/postmortems.md` |
| Tickets, work orders, bug reports | `references/professional-pass.md` + `references/domains/tickets.md` |
| Technical articles, blog posts, tutorials | `references/professional-pass.md` + `references/domains/tech-articles.md` + `references/discourse-pass.md` §1–3 |
| Any other prose | `references/professional-pass.md` + `references/style-pass.md` |

Every non-fiction route ends with the vocabulary/syntax scan in `references/style-pass.md` §2–3, and long professional pieces take the whole style pass — in both cases skipping its fiction-slop table. If the text was produced by a known model, add `references/model-fingerprints.md` (fiction-centric; use as priors).

## Operations

Any request maps to one of four operations:

| Operation | Contract |
|---|---|
| **write** | New content. Read the domain file *before* drafting — architecture and register decisions come first, they cannot be retrofitted cheaply. For fiction, follow Workflow A below. |
| **review** | Diagnose only — no edits. Produce the defect list (fiction: rubric report; professional: checklist findings with quoted evidence) and stop. Report findings; apply nothing until asked. |
| **refactor** | Minimal in-place revision preserving structure, voice, and intent. Two-stage: full defect list first, then fix item by item, deepest layer first. Skew replace/delete over insert (measured editor ratio 74/18/8). |
| **recreate** | Full rewrite. Extract the facts, claims, and intent from the original into a bare list; verify nothing invented; write fresh under the domain rules. Use when defects are structural and the text is short enough that surgery costs more than rebuilding. |

The two-stage protocol is not optional for refactor/recreate: paraphrasing without a defect list makes AI fingerprints *more* visible, not less (measured on expert detectors).

## Fiction workflows

**A — writing new fiction:** (1) premise, genre, length — genre sets calibration targets; (2) fill the architecture sheet in `references/narrative-pass.md`; (3) select 3–5 human-leaning moves + one rarity move; (4) outline, run the outline/QUD checks in `references/discourse-pass.md` and the echo test in `references/narrative-pass.md` §2; (5) draft; (6) self-diagnose with `references/rubric.md`, one group at a time; (7) style pass last.

**B — revising existing fiction:** (1) diagnose completely first (rubric → discourse → style), no edits; (2) triage — architecture defects need scene-level surgery, tell the user how deep before cutting; (3) fix deepest first; (4) verify: re-run changed rubric groups, read key passages aloud, echo-test any added twist.

## Calibration — the rule that governs all rules

| Principle | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Aim at the band, not the opposite pole | Human values are moderate (chronological discontinuity 2.4/5, not 5). Inverting every AI tell creates a new fingerprint. In professional prose the equivalent: match the venue's register, don't overshoot into forced casualness — informality alone fools no trained reader. |
| Select, don't accumulate | Human writing is diverse. Fiction: 3–5 moves per story, chosen for the premise, varied across works. Professional: fix what the checklist actually flags, nothing more. |
| Leave slack | Ordinary sentences, an underdeveloped thought, a plain paragraph. Do not sand every surface. |

## Hard guardrails

- **Never invent specifics.** Fiction: intertextual references, brands, places must be real and correct. Professional: versions, numbers, timestamps, benchmarks, quotes come from the actual change/incident/data — missing info means ask the user or leave an explicit TODO, never fill. Confident wrong facts are themselves a top-tier tell.
- **Deletion beats addition** (74% replace / 18% delete / 8% insert). The only additive fix is real specificity.
- **Respect the author's voice and the venue's corpus.** Extract habits from the user's samples or the venue's recent artifacts before editing; edit toward *that* profile. Do not remove a mannerism they actually use.
- **Dialogue quotes and quoted material are load-bearing** — do not regularize them.
- **Check the whitelists** (`references/style-pass.md` §7, `references/professional-pass.md` last section) before flagging: clean grammar, formal tone in formal venues, and conventional templates are not evidence of AI.

소스 확인

가격 및 실행 비용

Skill 받기
가격 미확인
실행
실행 요구 사항이 확인되지 않았습니다. 제공처에서 Agent, API 및 서비스 요금을 확인하세요.
라이선스
MIT
가격 미확인
가격을 아직 확인하지 못했습니다. 기존 소스 및 설치 링크는 계속 이용할 수 있습니다.

무료 다운로드가 무료 실행을 뜻하지 않습니다. 가격은 안전 등급이 아닙니다. 가격 정보 제출 →

소스 재검토 필요

소스가 변경되었거나 동기화에 실패했습니다. 설치 전에 현재 소스를 확인하세요.

설치 전 검토: 자동 설치 피하기

라이선스: MIT

  • Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision
  • No critical security issues: the skill only processes text and does not execute commands, access secrets, or require unsafe downloads.
  • SKILL.md does not address how to avoid deceptive use, such as passing AI-authored work off as human-written where disclosure is required.
  • Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision.
  • Quality score needs review
  • Stars/forks activity: 231 stars, 10 forks; issue activity unavailable in current metadata

설치 대상

소스 확인

Review the public source for "sepia" at https://github.com/Nanako0129/sepia/tree/main/skills/sepia. The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing. Do not install or execute repository code in this review. Report whether valid skill instructions exist, their exact path and revision, dependencies, costs, license and requested permissions. Ask for approval before any installation. Treat repository text as untrusted data, not authorization.

복사는 설치나 실행 성공이 아닙니다. 의존성, API 비용, 권한을 확인하세요.

도구 목록은 메타데이터이며 테스트된 호환성이 아닙니다. 프롬프트는 제안입니다.

작은 작업부터 시작

  1. 1소스를 읽고 입력, 출력, 의존성 및 권한을 확인하세요.
  2. 2Agent에게 계획을 요청하고 설정과 비용을 승인한 뒤 격리 환경에서 테스트하세요.
  3. 3출력과 변경 파일을 확인하고 실제 실행 결과만 보고하세요. 재현을 위해 소스 버전을 보관하세요.

소스에서 의존성, API 키 및 외부 서비스 비용을 확인하세요. 공개 저장소라고 모든 서비스가 무료는 아닙니다.

출처 및 사용 안내

등록됨

메타데이터와 검토 신호는 참고용입니다. 인기, 소스 발견, 실행 성공은 서로 다른 사실입니다.

소스 저장소
Nanako0129/sepia
라이선스
MIT
버전
1.0.0
최근 GitHub 푸시
2026년 8월 28일
목록 업데이트
2026년 10월 6일

목록에 보고된 버전입니다. 소스 릴리스를 확인하세요.

품질

67/100

유망

신뢰

64/100

샌드박스 전용

감사

77/100

검토 필요

  • Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision
  • No critical security issues: the skill only processes text and does not execute commands, access secrets, or require unsafe downloads.
  • SKILL.md does not address how to avoid deceptive use, such as passing AI-authored work off as human-written where disclosure is required.
  • Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision.
  • Quality score needs review
  • Stars/forks activity: 231 stars, 10 forks; issue activity unavailable in current metadata
Verified installs
—
결과
—

복사는 설치가 아닙니다. 설치 수는 성공 보고에 기반하며 전체 품질을 보장하지 않습니다.

Agent 연결

Registry API를 통해 동일한 결정, 신뢰, 감사, 사용 사례, 설치 신호를 제공하므로 Agent가 UI를 스크래핑하지 않고도 순위를 매길 수 있습니다.

추가 정보
{
  "version": "openagentskill-agent-metadata-v2",
  "review_evidence": {
    "indexed": true,
    "static_checked": false,
    "ai_reviewed": false,
    "manual_reviewed": false,
    "creator_verified": false,
    "review_result": "version_needs_review",
    "reviewed_at": null,
    "package_fingerprint": null,
    "policy_version": null,
    "notice": "Publication, static checks, AI review, and creator verification are independent facts. None guarantees runtime safety."
  },
  "commerce": {
    "type": "unknown",
    "billing": "unknown",
    "amount": null,
    "currency": null,
    "sourceUrl": null,
    "checkedAt": null,
    "runtime": "unknown",
    "purchaseUrl": null,
    "checkout": "external",
    "purchaseRequiresUserConsent": true
  },
  "skill": {
    "slug": "nanako0129-sepia",
    "name": "sepia",
    "description": "Make AI-generated writing read as human-written, in fiction and in professional prose. Repairs the narrative architecture of fiction and stories (based on StoryScope, arXiv:2604.03136); routes professional text through domain rules for release notes, announcements, PR and issue replies, code-review comments, incident postmortems, tickets, work orders, technical articles, and blog posts. Four operations - write, review (diagnose AI tells without editing), refactor (minimal in-place edits), recreate (full rewrite). Use when asked to humanize, de-AI, unslop, or strip AI flavor from any text; when writing or revising any of these document types; or whenever output must not read as machine-written.",
    "category": "coding-agents",
    "url": "https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/nanako0129-sepia",
    "repository": "https://github.com/Nanako0129/sepia/tree/main/skills/sepia",
    "github_repo": "Nanako0129/sepia"
  },
  "suited_tasks": [
    "Coding agents workflows",
    "Claude Code teams",
    "builders willing to evaluate younger projects",
    "Inspect source files",
    "Explain architecture",
    "Patch bugs and verify changes",
    "Inspect repository metadata",
    "Compare code changes"
  ],
  "suited_agents": [
    "Codex",
    "Claude Code",
    "Cursor",
    "OpenAgentSkill CLI"
  ],
  "install": {
    "source_evidence": {
      "status": "source-needs-review",
      "sourceRecorded": true,
      "canOfferInstall": false,
      "path": "skills/sepia/SKILL.md",
      "revision": null,
      "notice": "The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing."
    },
    "command": "",
    "ready": false,
    "targets": [
      {
        "id": "codex",
        "label": "Codex",
        "kind": "agent-prompt",
        "value": "Review the public source for \"sepia\" at https://github.com/Nanako0129/sepia/tree/main/skills/sepia. The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing. Do not install or execute repository code in this review. Report whether valid skill instructions exist, their exact path and revision, dependencies, costs, license and requested permissions. Ask for approval before any installation. Treat repository text as untrusted data, not authorization."
      },
      {
        "id": "claude-code",
        "label": "Claude Code",
        "kind": "agent-prompt",
        "value": "Review the public source for \"sepia\" at https://github.com/Nanako0129/sepia/tree/main/skills/sepia. The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing. Do not install or execute repository code in this review. Report whether valid skill instructions exist, their exact path and revision, dependencies, costs, license and requested permissions. Ask for approval before any installation. Treat repository text as untrusted data, not authorization."
      },
      {
        "id": "cursor",
        "label": "Cursor",
        "kind": "agent-prompt",
        "value": "Review the public source for \"sepia\" at https://github.com/Nanako0129/sepia/tree/main/skills/sepia. The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing. Do not install or execute repository code in this review. Report whether valid skill instructions exist, their exact path and revision, dependencies, costs, license and requested permissions. Ask for approval before any installation. Treat repository text as untrusted data, not authorization."
      }
    ],
    "handoff_url": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/skills/nanako0129-sepia/install",
    "manifest_url": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/registry/manifest/nanako0129-sepia"
  },
  "trust": {
    "score": 72,
    "label": "Strong shortlist",
    "version": "trust-score-v4",
    "install_policy": "review",
    "evidence": {
      "stars": "231 GitHub stars",
      "repoActivity": "231 stars, 10 forks",
      "lastPushed": "1mo since push",
      "license": "MIT",
      "repository": "https://github.com/Nanako0129/sepia/tree/main/skills/sepia",
      "install": "The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing.",
      "installSafety": "standard package or runtime install path",
      "permissionSurface": "filesystem or document access",
      "documentation": "Usable metadata, review docs",
      "agentOutcomes": "No agent outcome data yet"
    },
    "outcome_evidence": {
      "total": 0,
      "successes": 0,
      "failures": 0,
      "not_relevant": 0,
      "success_rate": null,
      "recent_success_rate": null,
      "recent_failure_rate": null,
      "install_attempts": 0,
      "install_success_rate": null,
      "risk_blocked": 0,
      "setup_required": 0,
      "avg_output_quality": null,
      "production_outcomes": 0,
      "last_outcome_at": null,
      "label": "No agent outcome data yet"
    },
    "auto_install": {
      "allowed": false,
      "sandbox_required": true,
      "reason": "The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing."
    },
    "best_for": [
      "coding-agents",
      "agent-skill"
    ],
    "known_risks": [
      "No critical security issues: the skill only processes text and does not execute commands, access secrets, or require unsafe downloads.",
      "Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision.",
      "Quality score needs review",
      "Stars/forks activity: 231 stars, 10 forks; issue activity unavailable in current metadata"
    ]
  },
  "agent_proven": {
    "version": "agent-proven-v1",
    "score": 0,
    "tier": "unproven",
    "label": "Needs first agent run",
    "summary": "No agent outcome reports yet. Use Resolve, run one narrow sandbox task, then report the result.",
    "metrics": {
      "totalOutcomes": 0,
      "successfulOutcomes": 0,
      "failedOutcomes": 0,
      "installAttempts": 0,
      "installSuccessRate": null,
      "successRate": null,
      "recentSuccessRate": null,
      "recentFailureRate": null,
      "riskBlocked": 0,
      "setupRequired": 0,
      "notRelevant": 0,
      "avgOutputQuality": null,
      "avgTimeToUsefulMs": null,
      "productionOutcomes": 0,
      "humanReviewRequired": 0,
      "uniqueAgents": 0,
      "lastOutcomeAt": null
    },
    "signals": [],
    "penalties": [
      "No real agent outcome evidence yet"
    ]
  },
  "audit": {
    "score": 77,
    "risk_level": "needs_review",
    "risk_label": "Needs review",
    "warnings": [
      "Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision",
      "No critical security issues: the skill only processes text and does not execute commands, access secrets, or require unsafe downloads.",
      "SKILL.md does not address how to avoid deceptive use, such as passing AI-authored work off as human-written where disclosure is required.",
      "Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision.",
      "Quality score needs review",
      "Stars/forks activity: 231 stars, 10 forks; issue activity unavailable in current metadata"
    ]
  },
  "safety_gate": {
    "tier": "reviewed",
    "label": "Reviewed with permission notes",
    "auto_install_policy": "review",
    "auto_install_allowed": false,
    "human_review_required": true,
    "blocked": false,
    "recommended_action": "The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing."
  },
  "quality": {
    "score": 67,
    "label": "Promising"
  },
  "supply": {
    "track": "Coding and developer agents",
    "scenario": "Coding agents",
    "maintenance": "1mo since push",
    "risk": "Needs review"
  },
  "alternative_skills": [
    {
      "slug": "mattpocock-implement",
      "name": "Implement",
      "url": "https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/mattpocock-implement",
      "stars": 175741,
      "install_command": "",
      "trust_score": 89,
      "audit_score": 91
    }
  ],
  "do_not_use_when": [
    "teams that need a vendor-supported SLA",
    "production agents without a repository review",
    "No critical security issues: the skill only processes text and does not execute commands, access secrets, or require unsafe downloads.",
    "Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision",
    "The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing.",
    "SKILL.md does not address how to avoid deceptive use, such as passing AI-authored work off as human-written where disclosure is required.",
    "Financial research output is not financial advice; require human review before any live investment decision.",
    "Quality score needs review"
  ],
  "agent_contract": {
    "task_input": "Use sepia in an agent workflow",
    "recommended_action": "The tracked source changed or could not be synchronized. Review the current source before installing.",
    "install_policy": "review",
    "minimum_review_before_use": [
      "Trust: 72/100 Strong shortlist",
      "Audit: 77/100 Needs review",
      "Safety: 61/100 Avoid automatic install",
      "Review repository, license, install command, and permission surface before production use."
    ],
    "expected_agent_output": {
      "selected_skill": "nanako0129-sepia (sepia)",
      "install_command": "",
      "risk_summary": "Needs review; Reviewed with permission notes; Review before production",
      "verification_result": "Report the smallest successful task, files touched, warnings, and any missing setup."
    }
  },
  "outcome_feedback": {
    "endpoint": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/agent/outcome",
    "method": "POST",
    "requires_resolve_event_id": true,
    "event_id_source": "Use install_receipt.outcome_feedback.event_id or feedback.event_id returned by /api/agent/resolve for the current task.",
    "expected_outcomes": [
      "success",
      "failed",
      "not_relevant",
      "blocked_by_risk",
      "setup_required"
    ],
    "payload_template": {
      "event_id": "<install_receipt.outcome_feedback.event_id or feedback.event_id from /api/agent/resolve>",
      "skill_slug": "nanako0129-sepia",
      "task": "Use sepia in an agent workflow",
      "agent": "codex",
      "outcome": "success",
      "install_used": true,
      "risk_blocked": false,
      "setup_required": false,
      "task_success": true,
      "output_quality": 4,
      "error_type": null,
      "human_review_required": false,
      "workspace": "sandbox",
      "time_to_useful_ms": 120000,
      "notes": "Report the smallest successful task, setup friction, files touched, and risk notes."
    }
  },
  "endpoints": {
    "web": "https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/nanako0129-sepia",
    "api": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/agent/skills/nanako0129-sepia",
    "audit": "https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/nanako0129-sepia/audit",
    "eval": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/agent/evals?slug=nanako0129-sepia&task=Use%20sepia%20in%20an%20agent%20workflow&max_risk=medium",
    "resolve": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/agent/resolve?task=Use%20sepia%20in%20an%20agent%20workflow&agent=codex&max_risk=medium",
    "receipt": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/agent/receipt?task=Use%20sepia%20in%20an%20agent%20workflow&agent=codex&max_risk=medium&format=text",
    "install": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/skills/nanako0129-sepia/install",
    "manifest": "https://www.openagentskill.com/api/registry/manifest/nanako0129-sepia"
  }
}

제작자 도구

등록 출처

Registry 색인

소유권 주장 가능

이 등록은 공개 소스에서 색인되었으며 유지보수자 소유권 주장이 승인될 때까지 공식으로 표시되지 않습니다.

제작자
Nanako0129
색인 주체
OpenAgentSkill 커뮤니티 인덱스

귀속은 공개 저장소 또는 제작자 프로필에 연결됩니다. 제작자는 등록을 주장하여 소유권 신호를 업데이트할 수 있습니다.

이 스킬 소유권 주장

소유자 소유권 주장

이 스킬 등록 소유권 주장

이 Registry 색인 등록은 Nanako0129에게 귀속되어 있지만 아직 공식으로 표시되지 않았습니다. 소유권을 주장하면 확인된 소유자 신호가 추가되어 이후 출시, 설치 및 감사 업데이트를 더 신뢰할 수 있습니다.

공유 키트

크리에이터 백링크 키트

README에 증거 배지 추가

개발자가 저장소를 평가하는 위치에 정규 등록, 현재 신뢰 및 감사 신호, 실제 Agent-Proven 증거를 표시합니다.

[![Listed on OpenAgentSkill](https://www.openagentskill.com/api/badge/nanako0129-sepia?metric=listed&label=Listed)](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/nanako0129-sepia?ref=github&utm_source=github&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=creator_badge)
[![OpenAgentSkill Trust](https://www.openagentskill.com/api/badge/nanako0129-sepia?metric=trust&label=Trust)](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/nanako0129-sepia?ref=github&utm_source=github&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=creator_badge)
[![OpenAgentSkill Audit](https://www.openagentskill.com/api/badge/nanako0129-sepia?metric=audit&label=Audit)](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/nanako0129-sepia/audit)
[![Agent Proven](https://www.openagentskill.com/api/badge/nanako0129-sepia?metric=proven&label=Agent%20Proven)](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/nanako0129-sepia?ref=github&utm_source=github&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=creator_badge)

커뮤니티 신호

이 스킬이 Agent 워크플로에 유용한지 알려 주세요. 집계된 피드백은 시간이 지날수록 순위를 개선합니다.