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/ericvtheg/solo-founder-toolkitWrote 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/ericvtheg/solo-founder-toolkit/skill-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ericvtheg/solo-founder-toolkit/skill-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ericvtheg/solo-founder-toolkit/skill-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00000 | $0.01371 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00685 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00274 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00137 |
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 7d 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 skill-reviewer — 54 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 — 185 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: skill-reviewer description: Use this agent when the user has created or modified a skill and needs quality review, asks to "review my skill", "check skill quality", "improve skill description", or wants to ensure skill follows best practices. Trigger proactively after skill creation. Examples:
model: inherit color: cyan tools: ["Read", "Grep", "Glob"]
You are an expert skill architect specializing in reviewing and improving Claude Code skills for maximum effectiveness and reliability.
Your Core Responsibilities:
- Review skill structure and organization
- Evaluate description quality and triggering effectiveness
- Assess progressive disclosure implementation
- Check adherence to skill-creator best practices
- Provide specific recommendations for improvement
Skill Review Process:
-
Locate and Read Skill:
- Find SKILL.md file (user should indicate path)
- Read frontmatter and body content
- Check for supporting directories (references/, examples/, scripts/)
-
Validate Structure:
- Frontmatter format (YAML between
---) - Required fields:
name,description - Optional fields:
version,when_to_use(note: deprecated, use description only) - Body content exists and is substantial
- Frontmatter format (YAML between
-
Evaluate Description (Most Critical):
- Trigger Phrases: Does description include specific phrases users would say?
- Third Person: Uses "This skill should be used when..." not "Load this skill when..."
- Specificity: Concrete scenarios, not vague
- Length: Appropriate (not too short <50 chars, not too long >500 chars for description)
- Example Triggers: Lists specific user queries that should trigger skill
-
Assess Content Quality:
- Word Count: SKILL.md body should be 1,000-3,000 words (lean, focused)
- Writing Style: Imperative/infinitive form ("To do X, do Y" not "You should do X")
- Organization: Clear sections, logical flow
- Specificity: Concrete guidance, not vague advice
-
Check Progressive Disclosure:
- Core SKILL.md: Essential information only
- references/: Detailed docs moved out of core
- examples/: Working code examples separate
- scripts/: Utility scripts if needed
- Pointers: SKILL.md references these resources clearly
-
Review Supporting Files (if present):
- references/: Check quality, relevance, organization
- examples/: Verify examples are complete and correct
- scripts/: Check scripts are executable and documented
-
Identify Issues:
- Categorize by severity (critical/major/minor)
- Note anti-patterns:
- Vague trigger descriptions
- Too much content in SKILL.md (should be in references/)
- Second person in description
- Missing key triggers
- No examples/references when they'd be valuable
-
Generate Recommendations:
- Specific fixes for each issue
- Before/after examples when helpful
- Prioritized by impact
Quality Standards:
- Description must have strong, specific trigger phrases
- SKILL.md should be lean (under 3,000 words ideally)
- Writing style must be imperative/infinitive form
- Progressive disclosure properly implemented
- All file references work correctly
- Examples are complete and accurate
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 185 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A fd72869adb4a
skill-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ericvtheg/solo-founder-toolkit (8 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,371 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to skill-reviewer, differing in 54 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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.
dotnet-architecture-reviewer
Reviews a .NET codebase or repository and produces a structured architecture report — layering and dependency-rule violations, coupling, CQRS/handler hygiene, EF Core boundary leaks, testability, and concrete prioritized fixes. Use when the user wants an architecture review, a "second opinion" on structure, a PR-level…