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 alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ide --skill bmad-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ideWrote 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/alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ide/bmad-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ide/bmad-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ide/bmad-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/alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ide/bmad-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ide/bmad-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 | $0.00117 | $0.02132 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00047 | $0.00853 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00426 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00213 |
Grade A, and why
bmad-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 today.
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 — 55 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
BMad Review
Review content through lenses — each a distinct method and stance — and report findings in one canonical shape. Report what is real — never pad to look thorough. Each lens sets its own stance toward the content and toward zero findings: for most an empty result is valid; the adversarial lens requires at least ten concrete findings and treats an empty list as a signal to re-check; the editorial lenses hold content sacrosanct and critique only how it is organized and expressed.
The lens set is whatever {workflow.lenses} resolves to, not a fixed list — overrides add lenses and replace shipped ones. Never claim a capability from this file; read the resolved lenses and work from those.
Inputs
- content — what to review: a diff, branch, uncommitted changes, file, spec, story, or any document. Args:
[path]. - lenses (optional) — one or more lens codes or names, however the caller expresses them: a spoken request, or a directive of the form
skill:bmad-review lenses=<code>[,<code>...](the form bmm'sdoc_standardsuses). Default: every applicable lens (a full review). - also_consider (optional) — areas to keep in mind alongside each lens's normal analysis.
- claims (optional) — the change's own narrative: the commit messages it covers, or whatever description of it the caller supplied. Goes to the edge-case lens alone.
- pre-resolved customization (optional) —
[workflow]field values supplied by a forwarding caller. See Execution step 1.
Conventions
- Bare paths (e.g.
references/lens-edge-case-hunter.md) resolve from{skill-root}— this skill's installed directory, wherecustomize.tomllives.{project-root}is the nearest folder containing_bmad/, starting at the project working directory and moving up through its parents. {workflow.<name>}resolves to fields incustomize.toml's[workflow]table (overrides win per BMad merge rules).- In
style_guide,review_guidance, andpersistent_facts, a value prefixedfile:is a path or glob — load that file's contents. If afile:value cannot be read, name the failed file in the output header and continue: the shipped baseline forstyle_guide, the remaining entries otherwise.
What ships with it
11 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- bmod.toml 84 B
- customize.toml 5.7 KB
- references/editorial-common.md 5.7 KB
- references/lens-adversarial.md 779 B
- references/lens-edge-case-hunter.md 5.7 KB
- references/lens-prose.md 1.3 KB
- references/lens-structure.md 1.5 KB
- references/lens-verification-gap.md 9.3 KB
- references/structure-models.md 1.9 KB
- scripts/tests/test_word_metrics.py 1.8 KB runs code
- scripts/word_metrics.py 3.6 KB runs code
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.
- today First seen · 55 lines · 117 tokens per session scan A 8548ce982fdb
bmad-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository alvin-reyes/better-agentic-ide (85 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 117 tokens to every session and 2,132 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-10-26.
Other skills, from other repositories
github-code-review
Review PRs: diffs, inline comments via gh or REST.
simplify-code
Sequential 3-lens cleanup of recent code changes.
requesting-code-review
Pre-commit review: security scan, quality gates, auto-fix.
hqe
Comprehensive codebase health auditing, remediation, and verification skill based on the canonical HQE Protocol v5.0.0.
assignment-review
A review skill for checking submitted Python, Go, code explanations, debugging notes, or practice exercises.
check-vercel-rules
Explicit Codex workflow: Run the packaged Vercel Labs agent-skills rule audit on the current project.