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 antropos17/Aegis --skill aegis-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/antropos17/AegisWrote 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/antropos17/aegis/aegis-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/antropos17/aegis/aegis-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/antropos17/aegis/aegis-code-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/antropos17/aegis/aegis-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/antropos17/aegis/aegis-code-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 | $0.00047 | $0.01098 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00439 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00220 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
aegis-code-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 — 49 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
AEGIS change review
Adapted from Matt Pocock's code-review skill; attribution and terms: LICENSE.
Bound the review
Read the selected checkout's AGENTS.md and relevant source. Record path, HEAD, git status and review target. Use aegis-context when available; otherwise inspect Vite and package configuration directly. Resolve the active renderer and runtime path before calling code missing or retired. Do not switch or clean another task's worktree.
Use the target supplied by the user. For a PR/branch, resolve base/head and inspect git diff <base>...<head>, stating that the base is the merge base. For a commit, choose its appropriate parent. For working changes inspect unstaged and staged diffs separately and read relevant untracked files from git ls-files --others --exclude-standard. HEAD-only review misses unfinished work. Ask for a base only when the request cannot be resolved reliably.
When workers may change the reviewed tree, agree on a frozen review scope and record its file hashes, including relevant untracked files. Recheck the scope and hashes after validation. Review any changed delta before accepting the result; otherwise identify the exact earlier revision covered by the review. Coordinate generated reports and source-mutating gates with their owner.
Find requirements in the request, supplied spec, linked issue and applicable contracts. Read issue/PR content without posting. No issue-tracker setup is required. If the spec is unavailable, state that limitation and continue defect/convention review without inventing requirements.
Two passes, one reviewer
Perform both passes yourself. Do not spawn subagents or external AI CLIs unless the user explicitly requests delegation. A review request does not authorize code fixes or publication; existing project authorization applies to actions actually within the task.
Requirements: trace each relevant promised behavior through its real callers and outputs. Identify omissions, wrong results and unrequested behavior. Consult current memory-bank notes as navigation, then verify source. A test count, successful command or old handoff is not implementation evidence.
What ships with it
2 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.
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 · 49 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 2f10c625a6f2
aegis-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository antropos17/Aegis (157 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 1,098 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-10-17.
Other skills, from other repositories
act-on-feedback
Act on user feedback attached to the current session. Use when the user submits feedback on the session's changes via the Submit Feedback button.
update-pr
Update the pull request for the current session. Use when the user wants to push new changes to an existing PR.
review-logging-patterns
Review code for logging patterns and suggest evlog adoption. Optionally use @evlog/cli (evlog init to wire evlog, evlog agents to write the conventions into AGENTS.md, evlog map to score entry-point coverage, --baseline to gate regressions in CI) on Nuxt, Nitro, Next.js, TanStack Start, and Hono. Guides setup on those…
winui-code-review
Review WinUI 3 code or changes for quality: MVVM, x:Bind correctness, accessibility, theming, security, performance, and WinUI analyzer findings. Use when asked to review or audit a WinUI app or its pending changes, or before committing. Catches issues the compiler and UI tests miss.
self-review
Weekly pass over the evlog repository and Evi's own surface, in two halves — what has drifted out of coherence (a capability wired but never consumed, code contradicting a written guide, a description promising a tool the allowlist lacks), and what is missing (a capability worth having, a manual step worth automating…
repo-health-sweep
Bi-weekly pass over the whole evlog repository, not just the agent's own surface. Checks every SKILL.md against the real package surface, the docs tree for stale or self-contradictory pages, the repo's own conventions, and the examples against the current API. Load this when the repo-health-sweep schedule fires, or…