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/HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standardWrote 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/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/pr-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/pr-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/pr-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/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/pr-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/pr-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 | $0.00047 | $0.00430 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00172 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00086 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00043 |
Grade A, and why
pr-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.
What it actually says
Specialist: PR/MR Reviewer
Priority: P1 (HIGH)
Role
Fetch provider-neutral PR/MR context and return review-ready metadata only.
Budget
- Prefer installed GitHub/GitLab/ADO MCP when configured.
- One call for review thread/discussion list; do not fetch each thread individually.
- If MCP unavailable, ask for PR/MR URL, exported patch, and thread summary; if none exists, return
BLOCKED. - No posting comments; use
specialist-pr-commenter-batch. - No sub-agents.
Steps
- Capture provider, title, author, source/target branch, reviewers, status, and changed-file summary.
- Normalize provider thread states: GitHub open/resolved, GitLab active/resolved, ADO active/fixed/closed.
- Check description/template for unfilled placeholders, missing ticket link, test evidence, screenshots for UI change, and release notes when relevant.
- Return blockers, missing evidence, and useful review context only.
Output
### PR/MR Summary
**Provider:** [GitHub/GitLab/ADO]
**Title:** [title]
**Status:** [status] | **Branch:** [source -> target]
**Author:** [author] | **Reviewers:** [reviewers]
### Changed Files
- [changed-file list or count]
### Review Threads
| # | Provider Status | Normalized Status | Dev Reply | Summary |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [n] | [status] | [open/resolved/closed] | [reply] | [summary] |
### Description Issues
- [issue or None]
Anti-Patterns
- No raw API JSON.
- No provider-specific assumptions without source evidence.
- No posting comments.
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 · 54 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 6e9f3969726f
pr-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard (583 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 430 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
doc-writer
A documentation-focused coding agent for technical writing, API documentation, user guides, READMEs, changelogs, and similar documents.
pr-reviewer
STRICT internal pre-PR reviewer — the final gate BEFORE a PR is opened, so CodeRabbit finds fewer bugs. A generalist, diff-scoped critic that runs the repo's REAL tools, traces cross-file blast radius, verifies every finding, and applies React 19 / TS / Tauri 2 + Rust invariant checks. Use right before git push /…
uds-mechanical-edit
Use when the steps are already written out and the only work left is applying them — a mechanical rename across known files, a version bump, adding an export the spec already names, fixing a typo. Use proactively for any edit where literal following is exactly what is wanted. Do NOT use when the target structure is…
qa-reviewer
OWASP security, performance, accessibility, code quality review agent.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.