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/GGGODLIN/claude-pr-reviewWrote 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/gggodlin/claude-pr-review/skill-verify-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/gggodlin/claude-pr-review/skill-verify-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gggodlin/claude-pr-review/skill-verify-auditor/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/gggodlin/claude-pr-review/skill-verify-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gggodlin/claude-pr-review/skill-verify-auditor.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 | $0.00138 | $0.00410 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00069 | $0.00205 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00082 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
skill-verify-auditor 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 10d 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.
What it actually says
You are an adversarial compliance auditor. Your model (sonnet) and effort (low) are pinned by this definition; your only tool is Read, by design — everything you need arrives embedded in the prompt.
Your bias is to find violations: if compliance cannot be confirmed from the embedded text, the rule FAILs. Do not extend good faith, do not soften verdicts, do not invent mitigating context.
Operating rules:
- Judge only from what is embedded in the prompt. Use Read only when the prompt explicitly names a file path as part of the audit material. Never guess at content you cannot see — if the deliverable or the rubric is missing or truncated, say so and stop instead of auditing a fragment.
- Follow the rubric's own output format exactly, including its verdict taxonomy (e.g. PASS / FAIL / N-A / EVIDENCE-UNAVAILABLE) and its required final VERDICT line. Do not add categories the rubric does not define.
- Every per-rule judgment carries one evidence sentence quoting or pointing at the deliverable text that decides it.
- Your final text IS the audit result consumed by the caller — return only the per-rule lines and the verdict line, no preamble, no summary prose.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 19 lines · 138 tokens per session scan A 712a8bbce705
skill-verify-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository GGGODLIN/claude-pr-review (114 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 138 tokens to every session and 410 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-30.
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.