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.
npx skills add AcKeskin/contexture --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AcKeskin/contextureWrote 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/skills/ackeskin/contexture/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ackeskin/contexture/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ackeskin/contexture/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/skills/ackeskin/contexture/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ackeskin/contexture/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 | $0.00108 | $0.07133 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00043 | $0.02853 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.01427 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00713 |
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 1mo 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 — 396 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
review
The review organ. Consumes discover, deliver, the architectural-rules tree, and routes corrections through capture.
Prep prevents drift by priming before code is written. Review detects drift after the fact and proposes concrete cleanups. Different jobs, complementary.
When to run
- User types
/review//review <path>//review --since <ref>. - Natural language: "review this", "audit the architecture", "check for drift", "look for dead code".
- Do not auto-fire. No session-end trigger, no task-end trigger, no hook-based trigger. Continuous monitoring is deliberately parked. User-invoked only.
Inputs
- Scope argument (optional). Determines which files the scan covers.
- Working directory —
$CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIRorcwd. Anchors project context and.claude/architecture.mdlookup. - Git repo presence. Enables
--sincescoping, TODO-age checks, and (optional) open/closed commit-history analysis. Degrade gracefully when absent.
Procedure
1. Resolve scope
| Form | Resolution |
|---|---|
/review (no args) |
Entire project — every file under the project root, respecting .gitignore |
/review <path> |
Directory (recursive) or single file |
/review --since <ref> |
git diff <ref>..HEAD --name-only — only changed files. Bail with a clear message if not a git repo. Skips Phase-1 orientation (§2c) and the persistent artefact (§7b) — --since runs are ephemeral by nature |
/review --vault (combinable with any of the above) |
Same scan, plus a copy written to the Obsidian vault per §7c. The in-repo .claude/reviews/... artefact is still produced. |
/review --expand (combinable with --vault) |
Force the vault artefact to use the subfolder layout (§7c) even when no threshold tripped. Useful when the user knows up front this review will accumulate iterations or attached discussion. |
| Natural language | Infer from task text; default to entire project when unclear; narrow to a path when the user named a module. "Save this to Obsidian" / "write to the vault" / "put it in my notes" enables --vault. |
What ships with it
4 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.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 396 lines · 108 tokens per session scan A 2aeb18f5d023
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository AcKeskin/contexture (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 108 tokens to every session and 7,133 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
Pair Programming
AI-assisted pair programming with multiple modes (driver/navigator/switch), real-time verification, quality monitoring, and comprehensive testing. Supports TDD, debugging, refactoring, and learning sessions. Features automatic role switching, continuous code review, security scanning, and performance optimization with…
md-audit
Read-only code quality audit — scan the current working directory for common issues (bugs, dead code, security hotspots, missing error handling) and return a prioritised findings report. No files are edited. Use when asked to "audit the code", "quick audit", "find issues", "code scan", or "what's wrong with this…
resolve-review-pr
Review an existing fix PR using the audited repro and full diff, preserving branch and approval rules.
oracle
Oracle second-model review: bundle prompts/files, debug, refactor, design.
brutal-honesty-review
Unvarnished technical criticism combining Linus Torvalds' precision, Gordon Ramsay's standards, and James Bach's BS-detection. Use when code/tests need harsh reality checks, certification schemes smell fishy, or technical decisions lack rigor. No sugar-coating, just surgical truth about what's broken and why.
cocoreview
CocoReview — structured code review with six-severity findings vocabulary, progressive disclosure architecture, and universal anti-pattern baseline. Invoked via $review [file] [--complexity] [--security] [--architecture] [--language ].