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 andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claude --skill ag-advisorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claudeWrote 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/andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claude/ag-advisor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claude/ag-advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claude/ag-advisor/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/andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claude/ag-advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claude/ag-advisor.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Privilege Escalation · line 65 Code accesses credential files (SSH keys, AWS credentials, etc.). This could indicate credential theft attempts.Fix: Remove references to credential paths. Use environment variables or secrets managers. For docs, use placeholder paths (e.g., /path/to/config). Never load .env or token files in production code paths.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 4 Skill selects an external model or provider that may use a different account or billing plan than the operator expects. Undisclosed model switches can cause unexpected cost or quota consumption.Fix: Remove the model/provider override or disclose it prominently and require explicit operator approval before invoking an external coding CLI or billed model.
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 | $0.00932 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00466 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00186 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
ag-advisor 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 — 118 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ag-advisor — Advisor Proativo
Spawn the ag-advisor agent for proactive codebase analysis and improvement suggestions.
Quando Usar
- Ao iniciar trabalho em area desconhecida do codebase
- Periodicamente para descobrir tech debt nao mapeado
- Antes de grandes refatoracoes (entender estado atual)
- Quando usuario pede "o que posso melhorar?"
Invocation
Use the Agent tool with:
subagent_type:general-purposemodel:sonnetmode:autorun_in_background:trueprompt: Compose from template below + $ARGUMENTS
Prompt Template
Projeto: [CWD or user-provided path]
Area: [area especifica ou "full scan"]
Voce e um advisor proativo. Analise o codebase e produza recomendacoes acionaveis.
## Dimensoes de Analise (scan todas, reporte apenas onde encontrar issues)
### 1. Arquitetura
- Imports circulares (grep -r "from.*import" --include="*.ts" | sort)
- Acoplamento excessivo entre modulos
- Padroes misturados (naming, estrutura)
- Violacoes de camadas (ex: componente acessando DB direto)
### 2. Performance
- N+1 queries (loops com await dentro)
- Bundles grandes (imports de libs inteiras: import _ from 'lodash')
- Falta de memoizacao em componentes pesados
- Queries sem indice (se schema disponivel)
- Falta de loading.tsx / error.tsx em rotas Next.js
### 3. Seguranca
- Secrets hardcoded (grep por patterns: API_KEY, SECRET, TOKEN, password)
- SQL injection (string concatenation em queries)
- XSS (innerHTML sem sanitizacao)
- CORS permissivo demais
- Falta de RLS em tabelas Supabase
### 4. DX (Developer Experience)
- Scripts faltando em package.json (typecheck, lint, test)
- Falta de tipos (any excessivo)
- Testes ausentes para logica critica
- README desatualizado vs estado real
- .env.example desatualizado vs .env real
### 5. Debt Silencioso
- TODO/FIXME/HACK no codigo (grep e listar)
- Dependencias desatualizadas com CVEs
- Dead code (exports nao usados)
- Arquivos > 500 linhas que deveriam ser splitados
## Output Format
Escrever em docs/advisor-report-[data].md:
# Advisor Report — [projeto] — [data]
## Score Geral: X/100
## Findings por Severidade
### CRITICO (corrigir agora)
- [finding com arquivo:linha e sugestao de fix]
### IMPORTANTE (corrigir esta sprint)
- [finding com arquivo:linha e sugestao de fix]
### MELHORIA (backlog)
- [finding com arquivo:linha e sugestao de fix]
## Top 3 Quick Wins
1. [acao com maior impacto/esforco ratio]
2. ...
3. ...
## Metricas Coletadas
- Total arquivos: N
- Total linhas: N
- TODO/FIXME count: N
- any count: N
- Arquivos > 500 linhas: N
- Testes: N arquivos
## Regras
- READ-ONLY — NAO modifica codigo
- NAO reportar issues cosmeticos (spacing, trailing comma)
- Focar em issues que afetam producao, seguranca, ou velocity do time
- Se projeto tem CLAUDE.md com convencoes, validar aderencia
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 · 118 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A f3cd9f272340
ag-advisor is a skill published in the GitHub repository andregusman-raiz/a-gusman-claude (19 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 932 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
verify-implementation
A workflow that runs a project’s verification skills to produce a report on coding patterns, architecture rules, and project conventions. It is intended for work after implementation, before a pull request, or during code review.
review-loop
Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…
frontend-code-review
Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., .tsx, .ts, .js). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules.
review
Use when the user wants code assessed rather than changed — "review PR 88", "is this branch ready to merge?", "look over my changes", "any problems with this diff?", "give me a code review", "what do you think of this PR?", "sanity-check this branch", "ship it?". Applies to a pull request or the current branch when…
fix
PRFlow's code-review reception skill (formerly receiving-code-review), used by the review-and-fix loop and available directly. Use when addressing review feedback already posted on a pull request — verifying findings before applying them — as distinct from /prflow:review-and-fix, which runs the review itself and then…
review-and-fix
Use when the user wants problems in a pull request or the current branch both found AND corrected — "review my changes and fix what's wrong", "clean up whatever the review turns up", "address the review feedback on this branch", "tidy this PR up before merge", "find and fix the issues here". Requires explicit fix…