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 akshan-main/review-by-opp --skill startgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/akshan-main/review-by-oppWrote 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/akshan-main/review-by-opp/start)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/akshan-main/review-by-opp/start"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/akshan-main/review-by-opp/start/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/akshan-main/review-by-opp/start"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/akshan-main/review-by-opp/start.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 | $0.00039 | $0.00600 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00300 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00120 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
review-by-opp:start 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
You are starting a review-by-opp session. This activates strict review tracking.
What to do
-
Check prerequisites:
- Verify this is a git repository. If not, tell the user: "review-by-opp requires a git repo. Run
git initfirst." - Check if a session already exists by looking for
reviews/current.json. If one exists, ask: "A session is already active. Use/review-by-opp:resumeto continue or/review-by-opp:finalizeto close it first."
- Verify this is a git repository. If not, tell the user: "review-by-opp requires a git repo. Run
-
Initialize session:
- Create the
reviews/directory structure:reviews/current.json,reviews/rounds/,reviews/summaries/ - Load config from
.review-by-opp.jsonif it exists, otherwise use defaults - Write initial
reviews/current.jsonwith:{ "session_id": "<uuid>", "started_at": "<iso-timestamp>", "updated_at": "<iso-timestamp>", "current_round": 0, "max_rounds": 4, "findings": [], "rounds": [], "final_verdict": null, "config": { ... } }
- Create the
-
Check for Codex:
- Run
npx @openai/codex --helpto verify Codex CLI is available - If not installed, tell user: "Install Codex:
npm install -g @openai/codexthennpx @openai/codex login"
- Run
-
Report status:
- Show session ID, max rounds, review scope, and blocking severities
- Show Codex detection status
- Show Claude model/effort: "user-controlled (via Claude Code UI)"
- Show Codex config: model strategy, reasoning effort
-
Set the rules: Tell the user:
Review ledger session started. Rules:
- After implementing changes, run
/review-by-opp:reviewto get Codex feedback - Use
/review-by-opp:fixto address findings - Use
/review-by-opp:statusto check progress - You cannot finalize until all blocking findings are resolved
- Use
/review-by-opp:finalizewhen ready to close
- After implementing changes, run
CRITICAL: You are the builder. Codex is the auditor. You must not claim work is complete while blocking findings remain open. The stop gate enforces this.
$ARGUMENTS
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 · 55 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 69a14fa4717f
review-by-opp:start is a skill published in the GitHub repository akshan-main/review-by-opp (6 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 600 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
flow-next-impl-review
Carmack-level implementation review of changes via the configured backend. Use when asked to review code or a diff in a flow-next repo.
flow-next-spec-completion-review
Verify that a spec's completed tasks fully implement the spec requirements. Use at spec completion before close.
flow-next-plan-review
Carmack-level review of a flow-next spec or plan via the configured backend. Use when asked to review a plan or spec.
flow-next-resolve-pr
Resolve PR review feedback. Fetches unresolved threads, triages, fixes, replies and resolves via GraphQL. Use when asked to address review comments.
flow-next-worktree-kit
Manage git worktrees (create/list/switch/cleanup) and copy .env files. Use for parallel feature work, isolated review, clean workspace, or when user mentions worktrees.
pr
Comprehensive PR/issue review - analyzes architecture, tests, identifies unrelated changes mixed in, drafts review comment or issue comment. Use when user asks to review a PR, check a PR, look at PR changes, or comment on an issue.