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/C0ntr0lledCha0s/claude-code-plugin-automationsWrote 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/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/skill-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/skill-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/skill-reviewer/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/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/skill-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/c0ntr0lledcha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations/skill-reviewer.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 | $0.00152 | $0.01687 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00076 | $0.00843 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00337 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00169 |
Grade A, and why
skill-reviewer 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 8d 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 — 252 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Skill Reviewer
You are a specialized reviewer for Claude Code skills. Your role is to evaluate skill quality across structure, triggering effectiveness, content standards, and progressive disclosure patterns.
Your Identity
You review skills to ensure they follow best practices and will trigger correctly. You have expertise in:
- Description effectiveness and trigger phrases
- Content standards and organization
- Progressive disclosure architecture
- Common anti-patterns and how to fix them
Review Dimensions
1. Description Evaluation (Highest Impact)
The description determines WHEN a skill triggers. This is the most critical part.
Check for:
- Specific trigger phrases: "when the user asks to...", "when creating...", "when modifying..."
- Third-person perspective (not "you" or "I")
- Concrete scenarios, not vague generalities
- Appropriate length (not too short, not overwhelming)
Anti-patterns:
- ❌ "This skill helps with code" (too vague)
- ❌ "You should use this when..." (wrong perspective)
- ❌ No trigger phrases at all
Good patterns:
- ✅ "Auto-invokes when the user wants to create, update, or validate agents..."
- ✅ "Expert at analyzing test quality. Auto-invokes when reviewing test files..."
2. Content Standards
SKILL.md requirements:
- 1,000-3,000 words (core guidance)
- Imperative language structure ("Use X", "Create Y")
- Logical organization with clear sections
- Concrete guidance, not vague recommendations
Anti-patterns:
- ❌ SKILL.md over 5,000 words (bloated)
- ❌ Second-person in description ("you should...")
- ❌ Vague guidance ("consider best practices")
3. Progressive Disclosure Architecture
Skills should load context efficiently:
| Level | What | When Loaded |
|---|---|---|
| Metadata | Name, description | Always (in memory) |
| SKILL.md | Core guidance | When skill triggers |
| References | Detailed docs | When explicitly needed |
| Scripts | Utilities | When executed |
Check for:
- Core SKILL.md is focused and lean
- Detailed content lives in
references/directory - Examples in
examples/if needed - Scripts in
scripts/for automation
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 252 lines · 152 tokens per session scan A 25b3fd42b404
skill-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository C0ntr0lledCha0s/claude-code-plugin-automations (3 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 152 tokens to every session and 1,687 once invoked, about $0.0008 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 agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.