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 Aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow --skill cross-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflowWrote 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/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/cross-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/cross-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/cross-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/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/cross-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/cross-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 | $0.00024 | $0.01490 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00745 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00298 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00149 |
Grade A, and why
cross-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 138 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Cross-Review — Structured Cross-File Verification
Execute multi-round cross-consistency verification on changed files. Exit only when a round produces zero findings. Focuses on inter-file structural consistency.
Announce at start: "Using ecw:cross-review to verify cross-file consistency."
Relationship with Other Verification Components
| Component | What It Reviews | Distinction |
|---|---|---|
| ecw:cross-review (this skill) | Intra-file/cross-file structural consistency | Multi-round convergence, focuses on document consistency, manual optional |
| ecw:impl-verify | Code correctness + quality | Multi-round convergence, focuses on code vs requirements/rules/Plan/standards, mandatory step |
| ecw:spec-challenge | Plan blind spots, boundary conditions | Plan phase, not implementation phase |
| verify-completion hook | Reference existence, compilation, knowledge sync | Mechanical hard intercept, not semantic check |
Execution Protocol
Round 1 — Cross-File Consistency Matrix
Goal: Is the same concept described consistently across multiple files?
Operations:
- List all files changed in this round (
git diff --name-onlyor from task context) - Extract structured content from each file:
- Table rows (markdown table rows)
- List items (bulleted/numbered lists)
- Enumerated values (e.g., "4 checks", "6 knowledge files")
- Config items (YAML keys, JSON fields)
- Dimension/field lists (e.g., comparison table rows)
- For the same concept appearing in 2+ files, cross-compare item by item:
- Table A row count = Table B row count?
- List A items = List B items? Same content?
- Are terms/names consistent across all files? (e.g., "Phase 3" vs "Risk Phase 3")
- Do quantity references ("4 checks") match actual content?
- For each inconsistency, record:
[FileA:line] vs [FileB:line] — describe the difference
Round 2+ (Conditional Trigger) — Fix Side-Effect Check
Triggered only when Round 1 found issues that have been fixed.
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 · 138 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 47f39b171609
cross-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 1,490 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
docs
Document hygiene — find stale, obsolete, duplicate, and scattered docs. Sync, consolidate, update, or remove. Interactive.
qa
QA testing — browse like a real user, document bugs, report only. Never fixes.
brainstorm
You MUST use this skill before /pm when work is ambiguous, scope is unclear, or multiple approaches exist. Explores problem space, proposes 2-3 approaches with trade-offs, and produces an approved spec document that feeds into both issue creation (/pm) and implementation planning (/cdt). Triggers: brainstorm, explore…
template-conventions
This skill should be used when the user asks to "plan a feature", "what goes in the phase file", "which file owns this", "what evidence class is this", "how do I verify a claim no test can settle", "where should this doc go", or when writing, reading or updating any zforge feature document under docs/{feature}/.…
incident
Incident response and postmortem generation from git/deploy context. When something breaks in production, this skill builds a timeline, identifies the probable cause, and generates a structured postmortem document. Flags: --since, --service, --sev, --revert, --comms, --dry-run.
presentation
Generate PowerPoint (PPTX) presentations from a topic, outline, or content file. Creates professional slides using python-pptx with consistent theming and typography. Modes: [topic] (from scratch), from [file] (from markdown), --slides N, --theme dark|light|corporate, --outline-only, --out [path], --lang [code].