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 agent-rig/rig --skill rig-tidygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/agent-rig/rigWrote 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/agent-rig/rig/rig-tidy)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/agent-rig/rig/rig-tidy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agent-rig/rig/rig-tidy/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/agent-rig/rig/rig-tidy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agent-rig/rig/rig-tidy.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 | $0.00056 | $0.00802 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00321 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00160 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00080 |
Grade A, and why
rig-tidy 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 — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Post-Merge Cleanup
Audit and clean up the diff from the last N commits. Catches dead code, unused imports, stale comments, and obvious duplicates that slipped in during rapid development.
Configuration
Reads .rig/config.json:
sourceScope[0]— the default directory to audit when no scope is given (default:src).test.command— the suite run in the verify step (default:npm test).agents.reviewer— the project's name for the canonicalreviewerrole (default:reviewer).
If the file is absent, use the defaults above and note you're running unconfigured.
Arguments
The user invoked this with: $ARGUMENTS
What to do
-
Parse the arguments.
- scope: directory to audit (default: the default source scope from
.rig/config.json(sourceScope[0], defaultsrc)). - commits: number of recent commits to review (default:
10)
Examples:
/rig-tidy→ default scope, 10 commits/rig-tidy path/to/dir 5→ that directory, 5 commits/rig-tidy 20→ default scope, 20 commits
- scope: directory to audit (default: the default source scope from
-
Show what will be audited.
git log --oneline -${commits} git diff HEAD~${commits} --stat -- ${scope} | tail -20 -
Audit the diff via a fresh-context subagent. Spawn a
revieweragent (mapped throughagents.reviewer) with this prompt (don't do the audit inline — the implementer context is too close to the code to spot dead-on-arrival abstractions):"Audit the diff
git diff HEAD~${commits} -- ${scope}for cleanup candidates. Categories: (a) dead code — exported symbols with no callers in the tree, internal helpers used once; (b) unused imports; (c) stale comments — TODOs completed by the diff, comments describing prior behavior, doc lines that no longer match the code; (d) duplicates — near-identical helpers, repeated inline expressions that could collapse; (e) inconsistencies — naming drift, mixed patterns introduced during the window.For each finding give file:line, the category, one-line justification, and the proposed deletion or merge. Skip anything you're not confident about. If the window is clean, say so."
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 · 81 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A a59c0437531c
rig-tidy is a skill published in the GitHub repository agent-rig/rig (3 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 802 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
template-comprehensive-assessment
Full checkout audit for the Research Project Template — tests, architecture, docs, manuscript, pipeline. USE WHEN user asks for comprehensive assessment, full repo review, health check across projects, audit everything, or pre-merge sanity sweep for template exemplars — even without naming docs/prompts or a skill. Not…
readiness
Use when the user wants to analyze, audit, or assess their codebase for AI agent readiness. Also use for "readiness report", "how ready is my project", "analyze my codebase", "audit my repo", "check my setup", or "what should I improve".
pr-sweep
Review every open PR with the code-reviewer agent and an adversarial review, apply the findings, and merge each one once CI is green. Use when asked to ship, sweep, or merge open PRs.
agentic-code-review
Use when reviewing a diff, pull request, branch, or AI-generated code for correctness, security, regression, test, performance, and maintainability risks before merge.
repo-health-check
Use when auditing a repo before changes to find the smallest safe PR, quality risks, stale docs, missing tests, ignored-file gaps, or agent setup issues. Best first skill for unfamiliar codebases.
receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation.