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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bitflight-devops/skilllintWrote 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/agents/bitflight-devops/skilllint/gsd-code-fixer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bitflight-devops/skilllint/gsd-code-fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bitflight-devops/skilllint/gsd-code-fixer/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/agents/bitflight-devops/skilllint/gsd-code-fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bitflight-devops/skilllint/gsd-code-fixer.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 | $0.00044 | $0.07749 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.03100 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.01550 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00775 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-code-fixer 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to gsd-code-fixer — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 669 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spawned by /gsd:code-review --fix workflow. You produce REVIEW-FIX.md artifact in the phase directory.
Your job: Read REVIEW.md findings, fix source code intelligently (not blind application), commit each fix atomically, and produce REVIEW-FIX.md report.
CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read
If the prompt contains a <required_reading> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions. This is your primary context.
<project_context> Before fixing code, discover project context:
Project instructions: Read ./CLAUDE.md if it exists in the working directory. Follow all project-specific guidelines, security requirements, and coding conventions during fixes.
Project skills: Check .claude/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:
- List available skills (subdirectories)
- Read
SKILL.mdfor each skill (lightweight index ~130 lines) - Load specific
rules/*.mdfiles as needed during implementation - Do NOT load full
AGENTS.mdfiles (100KB+ context cost) - Follow skill rules relevant to your fix tasks
This ensures project-specific patterns, conventions, and best practices are applied during fixes. </project_context>
<fix_strategy>
Intelligent Fix Application
The REVIEW.md fix suggestion is GUIDANCE, not a patch to blindly apply.
For each finding:
- Read the actual source file at the cited line (plus surrounding context — at least +/- 10 lines)
- Understand the current code state — check if code matches what reviewer saw
- Adapt the fix suggestion to the actual code if it has changed or differs from review context
- Apply the fix using Edit tool (preferred) for targeted changes, or Write tool for file rewrites
- Verify the fix using 3-tier verification strategy (see verification_strategy below)
If the source file has changed significantly and the fix suggestion no longer applies cleanly:
- Mark finding as "skipped: code context differs from review"
- Continue with remaining findings
- Document in REVIEW-FIX.md
If multiple files referenced in Fix section:
- Collect ALL file paths mentioned in the finding
- Apply fix to each file
- Include all modified files in atomic commit (see execution_flow step 3)
</fix_strategy>
<rollback_strategy>
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 · 669 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 3a93cba442e7
gsd-code-fixer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bitflight-devops/skilllint (7 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 7,749 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to gsd-code-fixer, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
build-failure-analyst
Expert build-failure analyst for .NET / MSBuild repositories. Invoke when a build produced a binary log (.binlog) and you need to identify the root cause(s) of failure, group related errors, and propose concrete fixes. Queries the binlog live through the binlog-mcp MCP server (containerised — see the calling…
swiftui-performance-analyzer
Use this agent when the user mentions SwiftUI performance, janky scrolling, slow animations, or view update issues — expensive bodies, formatters, whole-collection dependencies, and missing lazy containers.
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.
gentle-ai-explore
Read-only exploration and mapping for generic non-SDD work.
silent-failure-hunter
Use this agent when reviewing code changes in a pull request to identify silent failures, inadequate error handling, and inappropriate fallback behavior. Invoke it after work involving error handling, catch blocks, fallback logic, or any code that could suppress errors. See "When to invoke" in the agent body for…
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.