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 ahardin13/review-assistant --skill reading-pr-contextgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ahardin13/review-assistantWrote 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/ahardin13/review-assistant/reading-pr-context)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ahardin13/review-assistant/reading-pr-context"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ahardin13/review-assistant/reading-pr-context/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/ahardin13/review-assistant/reading-pr-context"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ahardin13/review-assistant/reading-pr-context.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 | $0.00032 | $0.03070 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.01535 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00614 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00307 |
Grade A, and why
reading-pr-context 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 8d 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 — 230 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reading PR Context
Gather all context for a PR review: metadata, diff, linked issues, REVIEW.md guidelines, and code-review analysis. Write everything to a session file. Do not present anything to the user — the calling skill handles that.
File I/O: Use Bash with heredocs or >> for session/temp files — not Write, Read, or Edit tools.
Inputs
pr_number: requiredrepo: owner/repothreshold: confidence threshold (default: 50)
Step 1: Clean up old sessions
Data dir: $HOME/.local/state/review-assistant (kept OUT of ~/.claude/ so "always allow" permission rules persist — paths under ~/.claude/ are treated as sensitive by Claude Code and re-prompt every session).
mkdir -p $HOME/.local/state/review-assistant/sessions && find $HOME/.local/state/review-assistant/sessions -name "*.md" -mtime +7 -delete
find $HOME/.local/state/review-assistant -maxdepth 1 -name "pr-*-recreate-*.json" -mtime +7 -delete 2>/dev/null
The second find prunes the recreate-backup payloads written by scripts/post-pending-review.py before each destructive DELETE; they live one level above sessions/ so the first find doesn't reach them.
Step 2: Check PR eligibility
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --repo <REPO> --json state,isDraft,title
- Closed/merged: Use
AskUserQuestion: "PR #N is closed. Proceed anyway?" with options "Yes, review it anyway" / "No, exit". Stop if no. - Draft: Proceed normally, note "This is a draft PR."
- Already reviewed: Check for existing session file(s) matching
pr-<NUMBER>-*.mdin$HOME/.local/state/review-assistant/sessions/. If found, use the most recent one (by filename timestamp). UseAskUserQuestion:"You've reviewed this PR before (session: ). How would you like to proceed?"
- "Full re-review" — start fresh, delete old session file
- "Incremental" — review only changes since last review (reads
last_reviewed_shafrom session file, usesgit diff <last_reviewed_sha>..HEAD) - "Update session" — re-analyze full diff, keep
## User Contextfrom previous session
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 230 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 6c264ceb6711
reading-pr-context is a skill published in the GitHub repository ahardin13/review-assistant (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 3,070 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
skill-audit
Audit codebases for quality, consistency, and broken patterns — use for pre-release or tech debt review.
review
5-pass structured code review — correctness, security, performance, readability, consistency.
critical-code-reviewer
Rigorously review code or pull requests for correctness, security, accessibility, maintainability, tests, and edge cases. Use when users request a critical code review, want a guided walkthrough of findings, need implementer-facing feedback, or want to prepare, create, or submit a GitHub pull request review.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
second-pass-review
Independent audit of sanitized specs in workspace/output/. Three parallel LLM-based reviewer roles check structural leakage, content contamination, and behavioral completeness. Run AFTER Layer 5 sanitization, BEFORE implementation handoff.
check-pr
Read-only inspection of a single GitHub PR lifecycle — checks CI, review threads, description sync, and mergeability, and returns PASS or FAIL with per-gate findings. Never invokes the merge button. Use when verifying a PR is ready to merge, polling lifecycle progress, checking mergeability, or babysitting a GitHub PR…