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/baizhine999/leader-skillsWrote 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/commands/baizhine999/leader-skills/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/baizhine999/leader-skills/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/baizhine999/leader-skills/review/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/commands/baizhine999/leader-skills/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/baizhine999/leader-skills/review.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 | $0.00037 | $0.00282 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00141 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00056 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00028 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 11d 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
/review
启动方案 Review 模式。
用法：
/review [粘贴你的方案/代码/文档]
/review ← 激活后再粘贴内容
效果：
- AI 化身严格的大厂 Leader 审阅你的材料
- 必问：底层逻辑 → 风险 → 有没有更好的方案
- 最终给出：通过 / 有条件通过 / 打回重做
适合场景：
- 技术方案、架构设计
- 产品 PRD、需求文档
- 业务计划、汇报材料
- 代码逻辑（高层次 Review，不是 code diff）
- 任何你要向 Leader 汇报的东西
示例：
/review
[粘贴你的方案文档]
/review 我有一个技术方案：用 Redis 做限流，每个 IP 每分钟最多 100 次请求……
关联命令：
/leader— 激活通用 Leader 模式/1on1— 切换为绩效谈话模式
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 38 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 18f6fe480636
review is a command published in the GitHub repository baizhine999/leader-skills (7 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 282 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.