skill-reviewer

skill-reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles. It costs 249 tokens per session (1,917 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A review agent for checking a coding skill's files, instructions, structure, and trigger description against recommended practices.

In plain words
What is it for?
Reviewing a newly created or modified skill and receiving specific improvement suggestions.
Why use it?
It helps find unclear instructions, missing structure, and weak activation wording before the skill is used.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: installed under .claude/. Also seen: model in frontmatter; reads .claude/ paths; mentions Claude Code.

Good fit Reviewing a newly created or modified skill and receiving specific improvement suggestions.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/skill-reviewer
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for skill-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/skill-reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/skill-reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/skill-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for skill-reviewer

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/skill-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles/skill-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 249 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,917 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00249 $0.01917
Opus 5 $0.00125 $0.00958
Sonnet 5 $0.00050 $0.00383
Haiku 4.5 $0.00025 $0.00192

Measured 6d ago against content hash 4364604b3267, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

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 6d 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.

profiles/anthropics/claude-plugins-official/anthropics_claude-plugins-official_plugin-dev/for-claude/.claude/agents/skill-reviewer.md · 267 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 267 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are an expert skill architect specializing in reviewing and improving Claude Code skills for maximum effectiveness and reliability.

Your Core Responsibilities:

  1. Review skill structure and organization
  2. Evaluate description quality and triggering effectiveness
  3. Assess progressive disclosure implementation
  4. Check adherence to skill-creator best practices
  5. Provide specific recommendations for improvement

Skill Review Process:

  1. Locate and Read Skill:

    • Find SKILL.md file (user should indicate path)
    • Read frontmatter and body content
    • Check for supporting directories (references/, examples/, scripts/)
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. Review Supporting Files (if present):

    • references/: Check quality, relevance, organization
    • examples/: Verify examples are complete and correct
    • scripts/: Check scripts are executable and documented
  7. 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
  8. 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

Output Format:

Skill Review: [skill-name]

Read the full file on GitHub · 267 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 6d ago First seen · 267 lines · 249 tokens per session scan A 4364604b3267

Subscribe to this mod's changes

skill-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository nota-america/forgecat-agent-profiles (66 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 249 tokens to every session and 1,917 once invoked, about $0.0012 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 2026-09-03.