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 amElnagdy/review-skills --skill babysit-prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/amElnagdy/review-skillsWrote 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/amelnagdy/review-skills/babysit-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/amelnagdy/review-skills/babysit-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/amelnagdy/review-skills/babysit-pr/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/amelnagdy/review-skills/babysit-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/amelnagdy/review-skills/babysit-pr.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00037 | $0.04406 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.02203 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00881 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00441 |
Grade A, and why
babysit-pr 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 323 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Babysit a PR
Goal: carry a pull request (GitHub) or merge request (GitLab) from "just opened" to "nothing left unanswered," without the human having to sit and refresh the page. "PR" below means either.
Review bots are diff-anchored samplers. Every push mints a fresh round, and a fix in one place can light up commentary somewhere adjacent. Left alone, a PR accumulates half-answered threads that nobody resolves, and the real bug in round three gets buried under nitpicks from rounds one and two. Your job is to be the person who reads every finding, decides what is actually true, fixes what blocks, and closes every loop in writing.
You know how to drive gh (GitHub), glab (GitLab), and git. What follows is only the judgment this
loop needs and the few API calls that are easy to get wrong. The harvest script picks the forge from
the cwd's git origin; everything it returns has the same shape on both, with a capabilities block
naming what that forge cannot tell you.
The three rules that matter most
Verify before you believe. A bot's severity badge is a guess made without running anything. Treat every finding, including the P1s, as a claim to check against the code. Bots are frequently right (that is why this loop is worth running), and they are also confidently wrong often enough that shipping their suggestions unexamined will introduce bugs. Read the actual code path before you agree or disagree.
Every thread gets an answer. A finding you fixed, rejected, or deferred is only closed once you have said so in that thread and resolved it. Silence reads as "ignored" to the next human who opens the PR, and it is how a real bug gets lost.
Publish before you answer. A "fixed" reply is only true once the remote branch carries the fix. Never post a confirmed reply, or resolve its thread, while the fix exists only locally. Rejections need no push. Reply with evidence and resolve immediately.
Harvest the round
Findings arrive on two different surfaces, and a round that reads only one silently misses half of them. This is the single most common way a babysit loop goes wrong:
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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 · 323 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 3fa0a8c5e018
babysit-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository amElnagdy/review-skills (108 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 4,406 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
comet-github-pr-review
A read-only review process for pull requests in Comet's GitHub repositories. A pull request is a proposed code change; the review checks its current code, related issue, comments, merge status, and automated checks.
resolve-pr-comments
Evaluate, fix, answer, and reply to GitHub pull request review comments and conversation comments. Handles both change requests (fix or skip) and reviewer questions (explain using reasoning recalled from past Claude Code transcripts). Use when the user asks to "resolve PR comments", "fix review comments", "address PR…
fetch-pr-comments
Fetch and summarize review feedback and conversation from a GitHub PR (unresolved review threads, review bodies, and PR conversation comments) without making changes. Use when the user asks to "fetch PR comments", "show PR comments", "check PR for unresolved comments", "list review comments", "what comments are on the…
reply-to-pr-threads
Draft, confirm, and post replies to GitHub PR review threads. Handles per-category reply formatting, re-fetches thread resolution state so auto-resolved threads are skipped, and posts via GraphQL. Use when the user asks to "reply to PR threads", "post PR thread replies", or "draft PR reply messages".
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
reply-to-pr-conversation
Draft, confirm, and post a single conversational reply to GitHub PR conversation comments (issue comments). The reply addresses all tracked items in one natural-prose message. Use when the user asks to "reply to PR conversation", "post PR conversation replies", or "draft PR conversation messages".