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 Alexander-Tyagunov/magician --skill scrutinizegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Alexander-Tyagunov/magicianWrote 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/alexander-tyagunov/magician/scrutinize)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alexander-tyagunov/magician/scrutinize"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexander-tyagunov/magician/scrutinize/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/alexander-tyagunov/magician/scrutinize"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alexander-tyagunov/magician/scrutinize.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00202 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00101 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00040 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00020 |
Grade A, and why
scrutinize 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 12d 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
$scrutinize — Codex Adapter
Read ../../references/codex-adapter.md, then read ../../../skills/scrutinize/SKILL.md and follow the source skill through that Codex adapter. Keep the source skill's gates, safety checks, and completion criteria.
Dispatch correctness, security, and simplification as generic Codex agents only when collaboration tools are available. Every prompt must be self-contained (Goal, Scope, diff/intent inputs, constraints, evidence, Return format); never request magician:* or other Claude profiles. Store intermediate review patches/reports in a temporary directory so the review phase remains read-only. Apply remediation to repository files only after the source remediation gate, and never commit without explicit authorization.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 11 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 013e6b54e91a
scrutinize is a skill published in the GitHub repository Alexander-Tyagunov/magician (14 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 202 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
reviewing
Claude-on-Claude code review protocol — reviews implementation against spec requirements and code quality standards.
loop-verifier
The checker half of a maker/checker loop. Independently reviews a proposed fix before it becomes a PR. Has authority to REJECT. Never makes changes itself.
g-review
Run the review gate on the current branch diff. Runs the test suite, captures the diff, and dispatches code-lead, which verifies done conditions and reviews the diff itself. Issues MERGE READY or HOLD.
g-refactor
Guided refactor workflow — identify target, pre-analyse, spec, approve, execute, review. Accepts a scope path, an audit milestone file, or runs interactively. Safe-by-default: checks test coverage before execution and runs the full review gate after.
g-audit
Full-codebase or targeted code quality audit. Detects SOLID violations, code smells, architectural drift, dead code, and test coverage gaps. Targeted scope produces an inline report. Whole-codebase scope produces a prioritised roadmap milestone.
g-blast-radius
Analyse the blast radius of a planned change. Inputs a file path, feature name, or list of paths from a plan. Outputs the set of dependent files (forward and reverse references), a per-file volatility score (commit frequency proxy), and a total blast-radius rating (low / moderate / wide). Read-only.