polygon-problems-generator: Skill for Claude Code

.agents/skills/reviewer-agent/SKILL.md

reviewer-agent is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from 7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generator. It costs 35 tokens per session (1,009 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review agent for competitive programming problems, which are coding challenges judged by automated tests. It checks statements, validators, checkers, generators, and solutions against detailed project guidelines.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for checklist-based reviews of individual problem components or complete competitive programming problems.
Why use it?
It helps catch unclear wording, invalid constraints, faulty judging logic, and missing tests before publication. This reduces errors that could make a programming problem unfair or incorrect.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: reads .claude/ paths; installed under .agents/ (shared by several agents).

This is 7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generator's own configuration. It tells Claude Code and Codex how to work on polygon-problems-generator itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything polygon-problems-generator configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to 7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generator. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generator/main/.agents/skills/reviewer-agent/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generator

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for reviewer-agent

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/reviewer-agent/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/reviewer-agent)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/reviewer-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/reviewer-agent/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for reviewer-agent

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/reviewer-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/reviewer-agent.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 35 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,009 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 3 findings, up to high

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

  • high Anti-Refusal · line 17
    Skill instructs the agent to omit warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Stripping safety caveats hides risk from the user and is a common jailbreak preamble.
    Fix: Remove instructions that suppress warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Let the agent surface safety-relevant caveats to the user.
  • high Anti-Refusal · line 18
    Skill instructs the agent to omit warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Stripping safety caveats hides risk from the user and is a common jailbreak preamble.
    Fix: Remove instructions that suppress warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Let the agent surface safety-relevant caveats to the user.
  • high Anti-Refusal · line 19
    Skill instructs the agent to omit warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Stripping safety caveats hides risk from the user and is a common jailbreak preamble.
    Fix: Remove instructions that suppress warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Let the agent surface safety-relevant caveats to the user.
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00035 $0.01009
Opus 5.5 $0.00014 $0.00404
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00007 $0.00202
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00101

Measured 10d ago against content hash 4b0e7bc3edae, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

reviewer-agent 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 10d 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.

.agents/skills/reviewer-agent/SKILL.md · 63 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 63 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Read .claude/shared.md first.

You are a strict competitive programming problem reviewer. Your job is to find every violation, mistake, or missing requirement in the components you review.

Shared: Read .claude/shared.md first.

Review Hints by Component

  • statement — short simple legend (avoid long stories), simple human English (not chatbot prose), all variables in math mode, preferred wording from tutorials/polygon-hints.md, consistent multiple-testcase format, output wording, renderable TeX, all four sections present, \times not \cdots, EPS images only, title has no commas or semicolons, known terms (permutation, MEX, ...) defined in a \footnote
  • validator — testlib.h included, registerValidation called, strict whitespace/EOF checks, named variables in read calls, setTestCase(i) per test case in multi-test, all bounds validated, sum constraints checked immediately after each test case, readEof at end, digit separators, no warnings, validator tests present
  • checker — standard checker preferred (ncmp for integer-only output, wcmp for strings or mixed output, yesno/nyesno/rcmp* where they fit), testlib.h included if custom, registerTestlibCmd called, readAns paradigm used, correct verdicts (_ok/_wa/_pe), checker tests even for standard checkers, no freopen, no warnings
  • generator — testlib.h included, registerGen called, opt<> for CLI params, rnd.partition for multi-test budgets, println output, edge/random/adversarial/max-IO coverage, FreeMarker script present, no duplicate tests (script lines, samples, and manual tests must all yield distinct inputs), at most 30 tests in total, 1–2 hand-written edge cases in manual_tests/, no warnings
  • solution — no freopen, no #define macros, no #pragma GCC optimize, C++17 template (solve() + main), Java Scanner template (solve() + main), no compiler warnings, correct I/O, matches expected tag (ACC/TLE/WA); for each file state the recommended Polygon tag:
    • acc.cpp → Main correct solution (clear, not over-optimized)
    • acc_java.java → Correct solution
    • acc_alt.cpp → Correct solution (different approach)
    • brute.cpp (non-interactive) → Time limit exceeded
    • brute.cpp (interactive) → Wrong Answer (query limit → interactor quitf(_wa) → WA, not TLE)
    • wa.cpp → Wrong Answer
  • originality — unless difficulty is Ace or Div2-A, originality.json must not report blocked: true
  • interactor (interactive problems only) — registerInteraction(argc, argv) (no third argument), flushes after every cout, sends -1 to solution before every quitf(_wa/_pe) on participant error, reads participant values from ouf with readToken() + parse_value (no bounded ouf.readInt on query values, it quits before -1), multi-test sends t to solution and calls setTestCase(tc+1) per iteration, statement tells the participant to exit on -1

Read the full file on GitHub · 63 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 10d ago Changed 4b0e7bc3edae
  2. 1mo ago First seen · 63 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 63ff22717432

Subscribe to this mod's changes

reviewer-agent is a skill published in the GitHub repository 7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generator (21 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,009 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

autoreview

Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.

openclaw/clawhub · 17 tokens

revdiff-plan

Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…

umputun/revdiff · 84 tokens

re0-merge

Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…

LilMGenius/paperthin · 70 tokens

asplos-writing-style

Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills · 65 tokens

ring:mapping-feature-relationships

Mapping how features relate and phasing the work: categorizing PRD features, grouping them into domains, charting cross-feature journeys, dependencies, and integration points, and defining the binding Phases that plan.md mirrors one-to-one at Gate 7. Gate 2 of ring:planning-large-features; runs after…

LerianStudio/ring · 104 tokens

code-reviewer

Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.

RightNow-AI/openfang · 17 tokens