Power BI Agentic Development is a marketplace of skills, plugins, agents, commands, and an MCP server that help coding agents work with Power BI and Microsoft Fabric. It is for creating and managing semantic models, DAX, TMDL, reports, dashboards, workspaces, and deployment processes, with the catalogue entries providing these specialized agent resources.
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/data-goblin/power-bi-agentic-developmentWrote 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/data-goblin/power-bi-agentic-development/python-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/data-goblin/power-bi-agentic-development/python-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/data-goblin/power-bi-agentic-development/python-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/data-goblin/power-bi-agentic-development/python-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/data-goblin/power-bi-agentic-development/python-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 | $0.00033 | $0.00418 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00167 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00084 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
python-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 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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed GPL-3.0
The repository is licensed GPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
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 · 44 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 89e78978862a
python-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository data-goblin/power-bi-agentic-development (1,060 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed GPL-3.0. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 418 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 agents, from other repositories
finding-critic
Try to refute a consolidated review finding from the code itself, answering in a three-verdict grammar: AGREE, DISAGREEEVIDENCE with a file:line citation, or DISAGREECONCERN. Use when the grounding pass of a review fan-out audits P1/P2 findings before they are posted. Never re-prioritizes, re-categorizes, drops or…
verdict-judge
Judge implementation completeness by receiving acceptance criteria and an evidence bundle, then returning per-criterion verdicts of PASS, FAIL, or NEEDS-HUMAN-REVIEW. Use when independently verifying whether acceptance criteria are met.
security-reviewer
Security scan specialist. Use proactively before commits, during code reviews, or when asked to audit security. Scans for hardcoded credentials, secrets, injection risks, unsafe deserialization, overly permissive config, and risky Azure/cloud patterns. Returns findings with severity and file:line refs; does not modify…
thanos
Simplicity reviewer for code diffs, design documents and architecture, applying Steve Jobs's principles. Use when the user asks for a Thanos review, a snap, or a rethink. Read-only; never edits files.
code-reviewer
Code review specialist for /ship skill validation.
senior-principal
The Senior Principal. Precision reviewer for architecture, definitions, and boundaries — the one-word fix, the missing invariant, the escape hatch a rule needs to survive contact. Verdicts SURVIVES / SURVIVES WITH FIX / DIES. Chairs the architecture chamber.