Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to alex-alecu/garden-desk. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/alex-alecu/garden-desk/main/.agents/skills/garden-desk-review-change/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alex-alecu/garden-deskWrote 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/alex-alecu/garden-desk/garden-desk-review-change)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alex-alecu/garden-desk/garden-desk-review-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alex-alecu/garden-desk/garden-desk-review-change/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/alex-alecu/garden-desk/garden-desk-review-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alex-alecu/garden-desk/garden-desk-review-change.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 | $0.00044 | $0.00229 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00114 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00046 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00023 |
Grade A, and why
garden-desk-review-change 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.
What it actually says
Review A Garden Desk Change
Top priority: apply the Minimum Work and Test Rules in AGENTS.md to every review. Treat unnecessary production code and unnecessary tests as P2 defects. Never request a test beyond the Test Rule.
Use AGENTS.md, accepted ADRs, and the active milestone as the baseline. Review in the order and with the P0-P3 severities in the development workflow.
For each finding give a concise title, severity, exact path and line, the failure scenario, and the smallest valid remedy. Do not report style preferences as defects.
Lead with findings. If there are none, say so and state the remaining verification limits. Review only; do not edit, approve, merge, or publish unless separately asked.
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 · 15 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 286338bb8a4f
garden-desk-review-change is a skill published in the GitHub repository alex-alecu/garden-desk (6 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 229 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
ai-slop-cleaner
Clean AI-generated code slop with a regression-safe, deletion-first workflow and optional reviewer-only mode.
code-review
A code-review checklist for examining code without rewriting it. It checks correctness, security, readability and performance, then labels findings by seriousness.
improve-codebase-architecture
Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.
requesting-code-review
Pre-commit review: security scan, quality gates, auto-fix.
continual-learning
Nightly refinement of an existing per-repo review-style prompt using this reviewer's own finding outcomes. Read confirmed (resolved-by-commit / thumbs-up) and dismissed (thumbs-down) findings, promote the bug patterns the team actually fixes, demote the false-positive patterns, reconcile against the current prompt…
plan-eng-review
Eng manager-mode plan review. Lock in the execution plan — architecture, data flow, diagrams, edge cases, test coverage, performance. Walks through issues interactively with opinionated recommendations. Use when asked to "review the architecture", "engineering review", or "lock in the plan". Proactively suggest when…