Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aeonfun/aeonnpx agentmods add skills/aeonfun/aeon/pr-reviewWrote 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/aeonfun/aeon/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aeonfun/aeon/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aeonfun/aeon/pr-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/aeonfun/aeon/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aeonfun/aeon/pr-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 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 Prompt Injection · line 12 Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
- high Prompt Injection · line 135 Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
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 | $0.00047 | $0.08360 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.03344 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.01672 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00836 |
Grade A, and why
pr-review scanned grade A with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 19d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
`gh` CLI handles GitHub auth internally — use it over raw `curl`, which would put a bare `$SECRET` on the command line for the Bash permission layer to refuse. Both branches route all outbound GitHub calls through `gh` / Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- pr-review — 89% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 468 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
${var} — Selects the branch and scopes it.
- Default (no
--survey) → per-PR deep review.${var}empty reviews every repo inmemory/watched-repos.md;${var}=owner/reposcopes to one repo;${var}=owner/repo#Nscopes to that exact PR.--survey(aliassurvey) → risk-tiered triage digest (the formerpr-merge). In this branch the remaining tokens follow pr-merge's grammar: passdry-runto skip notify (article + state still write), passowner/repoto override the target repo, combine with a space (--survey dry-run owner/repo). Empty target =aeonfun/aeon.Examples: `` (review every watched repo) ·
owner/repo(review one repo) ·owner/repo#42(review exactly PR 42) ·--survey(triage digest of aeonfun/aeon) ·--survey dry-run(refresh digest, no notify) ·--survey owner/repo(triage a specific repo).
Shared preamble (every run)
Read memory/MEMORY.md for high-level context. Scan the last ~3 days of memory/logs/ for recent activity and to avoid re-reporting the same signal.
Parse ${var} → branch: split ${var} on whitespace.
- If a
--surveyorsurveytoken is present → SURVEY branch (jump to "Survey branch"). Remove that token; the remaining tokens are parsed by the survey branch (dry-run,owner/repooverride, unknown → BAD_VAR). - Otherwise → REVIEW branch (default; continue below). The remaining
${var}is an optionalowner/repoorowner/repo#Nscope (empty = every watched repo).
The two branches never share mutation logic: the REVIEW branch posts PR comments/reviews via gh; the SURVEY branch writes the digest article + state file and (gated) notifies — neither performs an actual gh pr merge. Dispatch to exactly one branch per run.
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.
- 19d ago Changed · +4 lines f65736854dba
- 1mo ago First seen · 464 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 2389803f54ad
pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository aeonfun/aeon (778 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 8,360 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-05.
Other skills, from other repositories
no-mistakes
Validate committed feature-branch changes through the no-mistakes pipeline: intent, rebase, review, test, docs, lint, push, PR, and CI. Use when the user asks to run no-mistakes, ship safely, validate before pushing, or gate a change before it reaches upstream.
pr-creator
Create well-structured pull requests with proper descriptions and labels.
pr-description
Write or update a GitHub PR description as a short, skimmable list of key points grounded in the diff and real verification. Use when opening a PR or editing its description.
nox-review
Run an adversarial review of a code diff or a plan artifact under a second AI harness, headlessly, from an ephemeral git worktree with the repository's own instruction, hook and credential files removed. Use when a change needs a reviewer that did not write it, when a cross-model second opinion is wanted before…
pr-triage
4-phase PR backlog management with audit, deep code review, validated comments, and optional worktree setup. Use when triaging pull requests, catching up on pending code reviews, or managing a backlog of open PRs. Args: 'all' to review all, PR numbers to focus (e.g. '42 57'), 'en'/'fr' for language, no arg = audit…
validate-changes
Evaluate staged changes using LLM-as-a-Judge before committing.