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/permanu/superskillWrote 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/permanu/superskill/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/permanu/superskill/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/permanu/superskill/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/permanu/superskill/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/permanu/superskill/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 | $0.00012 | $0.00133 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00053 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00027 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00013 |
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 21d 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
Run a superskill review. Scope: $ARGUMENTS (empty = the entire project).
- Call the superskill MCP tool with skill_id "review/architect".
- Follow its protocol: project_context (full), resume, search (ADRs + learnings), then read every caller of each changed symbol.
- Walk all 18 axes against the scope; no axis may be skipped — write "n/a: reason" when inapplicable.
Output one line per finding: path:line: axis: severity: problem. fix.
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.
- 21d ago First seen · 12 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A d38eebfc0da3
review is a command published in the GitHub repository permanu/superskill (19 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 133 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-10-05.
Other commands, from other repositories
skill-registry
Rebuild the OpenCode skill registry for the current project and installed skills.
skill-creator
Create or update an OpenCode skill using the bundled skill-creator workflow.
cross-critique
Adversarial multi-angle critique. All three auditors fire in parallel (codex=technical, gemini=strategic, claude=ux). Counter-args ranked by rebuttal survival score, not raw severity. Usage: /cross-critique [--with | list | compare].
pr-feedback-ingest
Turn PR feedback (Greptile, CI, bots, humans) into a traceable backlog, so the next step is a narrow implement-approved-slice. Corrective scope only. Use when a PR has review feedback to map to files and slices. Do not use for a new direction or contract (use post-review-pivot), no payload, or task-memory drift only…
review-hard
Review the current task changes for correctness, safety, and maintainability risks before slice closure or PR prep, and recommend the smallest safe next step. Use when a slice or task-level implementation was completed, the user wants a focused engineering risk review before closure or PR prep, or meaningful issues…
pr-package
Prepare a GitHub PR delivery package (branch, commits, PR title and body, reviewer notes) from the real git diff against an explicit base branch, persisted as PRPACKAGE.md, never inventing work outside the diff. Use when scope is done and diff is stable. Do not use mid-implementation, for a branch name (use…