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/JairoTorregrosa/jaiskillsWrote 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/jairotorregrosa/jaiskills/advisor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jairotorregrosa/jaiskills/advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jairotorregrosa/jaiskills/advisor/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/jairotorregrosa/jaiskills/advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jairotorregrosa/jaiskills/advisor.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 | $0.00024 | $0.00789 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00394 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00158 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
advisor 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 9d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 80 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codex Advisor
Get an independent second opinion from a different-provider model (Codex/GPT-5) to challenge assumptions, identify risks, and surface alternative approaches.
Process
1. Gather Context
Determine what to send for review, in priority order:
- User provided a question → use that question as-is
- Active plan file exists (
*-plan.mdin cwd) → read and summarize the plan - Uncommitted changes exist → run
git diffto capture the current diff - None of the above → stop and tell the user: "Nothing to review — provide a question, create a plan, or make some changes first." Do NOT call Codex with an empty context.
Compose a context block from the above. Keep it under 12,000 characters — truncate diffs to the most significant files if needed.
2. Call Codex
Invoke the mcp__codex__codex tool:
mcp__codex__codex:
prompt: |
You are an adversarial advisor reviewing work by a different AI model.
Your job: challenge assumptions, identify risks, suggest alternatives.
Do NOT be sycophantic. Disagree where warranted. Be specific and cite evidence.
## Context
{{CONTEXT}}
## Instructions
1. Identify the 2-3 riskiest assumptions or decisions
2. For each, explain what could go wrong and suggest an alternative
3. Note anything missing that should have been considered
4. Give an overall confidence assessment (high/medium/low) for the approach
sandbox: "read-only"
approval-policy: "never"
cwd: "<project root — use git rev-parse --show-toplevel>"
3. Extract Thread ID
The response includes a threadId in structuredContent. Store it for the session — if the user asks follow-up questions, use mcp__codex__codex-reply with that threadId instead of starting a new session.
4. Present Results
Format the output as:
## Codex (GPT-5) says:
[Codex's response, lightly reformatted for readability]
## Claude's reconciliation:
- **Agree**: [points where Claude concurs with Codex's assessment]
- **Disagree**: [points where Claude has contrary evidence or reasoning]
- **Recommend**: [synthesized recommendation incorporating both perspectives]
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 80 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A b956a369d480
advisor is a command published in the GitHub repository JairoTorregrosa/jaiskills (5 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 789 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
devkit.github.review-pr
Provides comprehensive GitHub pull request review with code quality, security, and best practices analysis. Use when reviewing a PR before merging.
bug-check
Run automated tests and build checks first, then agent code review. For each bug found, propose or document a regression test.
pn-audit-data
Design or review database schema — normalization, indexing strategy, migration plan, and data model decisions. Surgical command for database design. Use standalone or as part of pn-backend-audit.
review-router
Route to the appropriate quality or review command based on the user's intent.
pn-audit-api
Surgical API design review — REST conventions, status codes, response shapes, validation, and schema leaks. Use standalone or as part of pn-backend-audit. Outputs a scored fix roadmap.
pn-audit-security
OWASP-guided security review — auth posture, input validation, secrets, CORS, JWT, rate limiting. Surgical command for backend security. Use standalone or as part of pn-backend-audit.