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/smarks26/claude-plugin-templateWrote 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/smarks26/claude-plugin-template/skill-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/smarks26/claude-plugin-template/skill-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/smarks26/claude-plugin-template/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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/smarks26/claude-plugin-template/skill-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/smarks26/claude-plugin-template/skill-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 | $0.00249 | $0.01398 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00100 | $0.00559 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00050 | $0.00280 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00140 |
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 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to skill-reviewer — 0 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.
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
Output Format:
Skill Review: [skill-name]
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 · 185 lines · 249 tokens per session scan A 78ac55ddc31d
skill-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository smarks26/claude-plugin-template (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 249 tokens to every session and 1,398 once invoked, about $0.0010 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to skill-reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Defensive code reviewer for /magi:review-code --single (or as a fallback when MAGI degrades to one reviewer). Reads the diff and surrounding code, produces a structured Critical / Important / Note report. Read-only — does not edit files. Default model is Opus-class.
developer
TDD-first implementation worker dispatched by /magi:go. Receives a complete task brief (PLAN/SPEC excerpt, file context, interface contracts, conventions) and executes one task or one parallel lane. Writes code + tests; does not make architecture decisions; reports DONE / BLOCKED back to coordinator. Default model is…
skill-verifier
A subagent dispatched by compounded's Stop hook to decide whether a proposed skill should graduate to .verified or move to .rejected/. Reads the proposed SKILL.md and the just-completed task transcript, applies the rubric in the compounded-verifier skill, and returns a JSON verdict.
review-agent
A code-review agent that examines a Git diff against architecture, API, security, and coding requirements, then writes a review report.
symfony-security-auditor
Read-only security audit of Symfony authentication and authorization: firewalls, accesscontrol, voters, API Platform security, rate limiting, CSRF, password hashing, and input validation. Use proactively after changes to security.yaml, voters, controllers, forms, or API resources.
code-formatter
Expert code formatter and linter specialist. Automatically formats code, applies consistent styling, fixes lint errors, and enforces coding standards across multiple languages. Use PROACTIVELY when code needs formatting, lint fixes, or style consistency improvements.