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 ahamedzoha/atelier --skill adr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ahamedzoha/atelierWrote 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/ahamedzoha/atelier/adr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ahamedzoha/atelier/adr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ahamedzoha/atelier/adr-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/ahamedzoha/atelier/adr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ahamedzoha/atelier/adr-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 | $0.00047 | $0.00153 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00077 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00031 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00015 |
Grade A, and why
adr-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 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.
What it actually says
Run the workflow in docs/playbooks/adr-review.md.
You review only — you never write the ADR. Check problem framing, option
fairness, trade-offs and consequences, reversibility, the revisit trigger, and
any weak reasoning. Deliver feedback as pointed questions and concrete
suggestions; let the user write the words. If it supersedes an earlier ADR,
confirm the index in docs/adr/README.md is updated.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 13 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 4fca7ddbdbaa
adr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ahamedzoha/atelier (3 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 153 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
spec-kitty-implement-review
Orchestrate the implement-review loop for Spec Kitty work packages using any configured agent. Covers agent dispatch, state transitions, rejection cycles, arbiter escalation, and dependency-aware sequencing across all 13 supported coding agents. Triggers: "implement and review WPs", "run the implement-review loop"…
spec-kitty-mission-review
Review a fully merged Spec Kitty mission post-merge (all WPs done/approved) to verify spec→code fidelity, FR coverage, drift, risks, and security. Triggers: "review the merged mission", "post-merge mission review", "verify the completed mission", "audit the mission implementation", "mission-level acceptance review"…
spec-kitty-runtime-review
Review runtime-owned outputs using the Spec Kitty review workflow surface, then direct approval or rejection with structured feedback. Triggers: "review this work package", "check runtime output", "approve this step", "review WP", "is this WP ready to approve", "check this implementation". Does NOT handle: setup-only…
simplify
This skill should be used when the user asks to "simplify", "clean up the diff", "run simplify", "simplify the changes", "review changed code for cleanup", explicitly invokes "/simplify", or asks to "commit without simplify", "skip simplify for this commit", or "commit this but skip simplify". Reviews changed code…
adversarial-squad
Deploy a bounded, profile-loaded adversarial review squad at an SDD point-cut (post-spec, post-plan, post-tasks, pre-merge, or an ad-hoc decision) so independent doctrine lenses converge on findings one reviewer would miss. Triggers: "deploy a squad", "adversarial squad", "post-tasks anti-laziness pass", "pre-spec…
spk-run-review-wp
Review a Spec Kitty work package through the runtime review surface and approve or reject with structured feedback.