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/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpersWrote 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/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review-ci)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review-ci"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review-ci/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/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review-ci"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review-ci.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 | $0.00013 | $0.01363 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00681 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00273 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00136 |
Grade A, and why
review-ci 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 12d 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 — 151 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Name
kubevirt:review-ci
Synopsis
/kubevirt:review-ci <pr-number-or-url>
Description
The kubevirt:review-ci command analyzes CI failures for a KubeVirt pull request, providing structured analysis of failed jobs, root cause identification, and remediation suggestions.
This command is designed to help developers quickly understand and address CI failures by:
Analysis Capabilities
- Job Status Overview: Summarize all CI jobs and their current status
- Failure Categorization: Group failures by type (build, unit test, e2e test, lint, etc.)
- Root Cause Analysis: Extract relevant error messages and stack traces from logs
- Flaky Test Detection: Identify tests with known flaky behavior patterns
- Remediation Suggestions: Provide actionable steps to address each failure type
Failure Categories
The command categorizes failures into these types:
Build Failures
- Compilation errors
- Dependency resolution issues
- Container image build failures
Unit Test Failures
- Test assertion failures
- Test timeouts
- Missing test dependencies
E2E Test Failures
- Infrastructure issues (cluster provisioning, network)
- Test timeouts and flaky tests
- Actual test assertion failures
- Resource cleanup failures
Lint/Static Analysis Failures
- golangci-lint violations
- gofmt/goimports issues
- shellcheck failures
Other Failures
- Prow infrastructure issues
- Quota/resource exhaustion
- Network connectivity problems
Implementation
Phase 1: Gather CI Status
- Parse the PR argument to extract the PR number and repository (defaults to
kubevirt/kubevirt) - Use
gh pr view <pr-number> --repo <repo> --json statusCheckRollup,commits,headRefNameto get:- All CI check statuses
- The head commit SHA for linking to specific job runs
- The branch name for context
- Identify all failed checks from the status check rollup
- For each failed check, extract the job name and failure context
Phase 2: Fetch Failure Logs
- For GitHub Actions workflows:
- Use
gh run list --repo <repo> --branch <branch> --json databaseId,name,status,conclusionto find failed runs - Use
gh run view <run-id> --repo <repo> --log-failedto get failure logs
- Use
- For Prow jobs (detected by check context containing "prow.ci.openshift.org"):
- Extract the Prow job URL from the check details URL
- Fetch the build-log.txt from the GCS artifacts bucket
- Parse the Prow job metadata for job type and parameters
- Limit log fetching to the most recent failed run per job type to avoid excessive API calls
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 151 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 7cf48cb3df26
review-ci is a command published in the GitHub repository lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers (2 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 1,363 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
qa-changes
This skill should be used when the user asks to "QA a pull request", "test PR changes", "verify a PR works", "functionally test changes", or when an automated workflow triggers QA validation of code changes. Provides a structured methodology for setting up the environment, exercising changed behavior, and reporting…
doctor
Diagnosticar y reparar problemas del framework Don Cheli, git y entorno. Usa cuando el usuario dice "doctor", "problemas del framework", "don cheli no funciona", "repair Don Cheli", "debug setup", "setup broken", "framework broken", "reparar entorno". Detecta y repara issues de configuración, git y dependencias…
fix
Universal debugging and fix application with semantic code analysis.
doctor
Badi configuration validation. Checks all Badi components and produces a diagnostic report.
http-service
Build, review or debug a Bun HTTP service. Loads the http-service skill, then works the task through its workflow.
gh-issue-use-cypress
Like /gh-issue-use-browser, but pinned to the Cypress MCP — use when your project runs the Cypress MCP for browser automation. Example — /gh-issue-use-cypress "Composer > Save" saving toasts failure but the record persists.