group-discussion-reviewer-methodology

group-discussion-reviewer-methodology is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from aaronartistzhang-afk/DailyWork. It costs 203 tokens per session (753 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A conversation-based method for reviewing a PRD, a product requirements document, as if it were being examined by a product group. It produces entry and review decisions plus P0, P1, and P2 findings.

In plain words
What is it for?
It helps assess whether pasted PRD text is ready for a group meeting, find approval blockers, and organize questions and improvement suggestions. It does not fetch links or expand spreadsheets.
Why use it?
It gives a structured review when no API key or runnable review engine is available. It focuses P0 only on issues that truly block approval, safety, measurable results, direction, or delivery.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit It helps assess whether pasted PRD text is ready for a group meeting, find approval blockers, and organize questions and improvement suggestions. It does not fetch links or expand spreadsheets.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/aaronartistzhang-afk/dailywork/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add aaronartistzhang-afk/DailyWork --skill group-discussion-reviewer-methodology
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aaronartistzhang-afk/DailyWork

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 group-discussion-reviewer-methodology

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aaronartistzhang-afk/dailywork/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/aaronartistzhang-afk/dailywork/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aaronartistzhang-afk/dailywork/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aaronartistzhang-afk/dailywork/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology/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 group-discussion-reviewer-methodology

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aaronartistzhang-afk/dailywork/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aaronartistzhang-afk/dailywork/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 203 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 753 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.
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 $0.00203 $0.00753
Opus 5 $0.00102 $0.00377
Sonnet 5 $0.00041 $0.00151
Haiku 4.5 $0.00020 $0.00075

Measured 12d ago against content hash 575e25bd009c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

group-discussion-reviewer-methodology 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.

skills/group-discussion-reviewer-methodology/SKILL.md · 43 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 43 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Group Discussion Reviewer — methodology (no key, inline)

Apply a disciplined product group-discussion review to a PRD directly in the conversation. No API key, no Node, no code execution — you (the agent) perform the review by following the written methodology.

This is the lightweight sibling of the group-discussion-reviewer engine skill. The engine runs the same pipeline deterministically (and gates P0s with code) but needs an OpenAI-compatible key. Prefer the engine when a key is available and fidelity matters; use this methodology skill when there's no key, or for a quick framework-driven review.

Honest limitation: without the engine's deterministic P0 gatekeeper, the strictness of P0 downgrading depends on your judgment. Hold the P0 bar hard.

How to use

  1. Get the PRD body as text/markdown (this skill does not fetch URLs or expand sheets).
  2. Read methodology.md in this folder and execute its 8 phases in order.
  3. Produce exactly the output contract: ## 组内准入, ## 模拟评审结果, ## P0 Blockers, ## P1 Questions, ## P2 Questions, ## P1/P2 Improvement Suggestions.
  4. Respect the mode the user asks for (standard / deep / challenge; default challenge) and the language (default Chinese).

The core discipline (summary — full detail in methodology.md)

  • Two independent axes: 组内准入 (is it concrete enough to discuss?) vs 模拟评审结果 (would it pass?). A PRD can be admitted and still 不通过.
  • P0 only for four failures: wrong direction/population, unmeasurable success (for a formal decision), unsafe launch, or non-viable delivery — each with a concrete product bridge. Everything else (stats audit, SLA/QPS/monitoring, tracking schema, release checklist, compliance checklist, naming/icons, missing sections) defaults to P1/P2.
  • A clean PRD has 0 P0. Don't inflate P0 to fill a quota.
  • Blind review: PRD body only; ignore comments/annotations/post-meeting context. Ask questions, don't answer them — except every P0 must include a concrete revision.

Read the full file on GitHub · 43 lines

Files

What ships with it

2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

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. 12d ago First seen · 43 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 575e25bd009c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

group-discussion-reviewer-methodology is a skill published in the GitHub repository aaronartistzhang-afk/DailyWork (1 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 203 tokens to every session and 753 once invoked, about $0.0010 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

create-custom-grader

Use when converting an existing benchmark, rubric, verifier, task YAML/JSON, or domain check into SkillEvaluator BYOG/BYOT custom evaluation.

NVIDIA/SkillEvaluator · 35 tokens

ab-test-generator

Generate A/B test variants for affiliate content. Triggers on: "create A/B test", "test my headline", "optimize my CTA", "generate variants", "split test ideas", "improve click-through rate", "test my landing page copy", "headline alternatives", "CTA variations", "which version is better", "optimize conversions"…

Affitor/affiliate-skills · 87 tokens

authoring-ci-workflows

Use when adding or editing a GitHub Actions workflow, composite action, or reusable workflow under .github/ — new CI jobs, triggers, matrices, checkout/clone tuning, action pinning, GitHub App token auth, concurrency groups, timeout-minutes, paths filters, caching, or runner choice. Covers PostHog's workflow-authoring…

PostHog/posthog · 193 tokens

debugging-mcp-analytics

Debug, support, and build PostHog MCP Analytics — product analytics for MCP servers (the @posthog/mcp and posthog.mcp SDKs plus the mcpanalytics product). Use when MCP analytics data looks wrong or missing ("events aren't showing", "intent clusters are empty", "sessions are missing", "per-tool numbers look wrong")…

PostHog/posthog · 211 tokens

debugging-ci-failures

Debugs failing GitHub Actions CI runs for PostHog PRs, commits, and branches, and answers broad CI-health questions ("is CI red?", "is master green today?", "what's broken right now?"). Use when the user asks why CI is red, asks for the current CI or master status, or mentions a failing check, GitHub Actions run…

PostHog/posthog · 198 tokens

monitoring-capture-service

Guide for using the Grafana MCP to monitor and diagnose the capture service (rust/capture) in production. Use when investigating latency, event loss, Kafka backpressure, Redis issues, rate limiting, Envoy proxy issues, or any capture health question. Covers prod-us and prod-eu environments.

PostHog/posthog · 66 tokens