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 arbiterForge/codeArbiter --skill ca-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/arbiterForge/codeArbiterWrote 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/arbiterforge/codearbiter/ca-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/arbiterforge/codearbiter/ca-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arbiterforge/codearbiter/ca-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/arbiterforge/codearbiter/ca-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arbiterforge/codearbiter/ca-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 | $0.00036 | $0.01431 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00572 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00286 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00143 |
Grade A, and why
ca-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 2d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed AGPL-3.0
The repository is licensed AGPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
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.
- 2d ago Changed · -3 lines 97de1d35ef09
- 14d ago Changed · +29 lines a643ace0c1c1
- 1mo ago First seen · 63 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 8173b634773f
ca-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository arbiterForge/codeArbiter (149 stars, last pushed today), licensed AGPL-3.0. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 1,431 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
blast-radius
Project-grounded blast-radius tracing for code changes, PRs, diffs, files, symbols, or bugfixes, especially in Helpdesk-style repos. Use before editing, committing, merging, or reviewing when downstream callers, tests, routes, SQL, configs, schema, auth/tenant boundaries, external integrations, sibling bugs, or…
enterprise-pr-review
End-to-end PR conversation closer and advisory review harvester for enterprise work. Use this whenever the user mentions unresolved PR conversations, Copilot/GitHub review comments, a PR that cannot merge, skipped/non-blocking Copilot feedback, a failed PR review, or asks to address/resolve/learn from PR feedback. It…
hardening-gate
Standards-enforcement gate that runs BEFORE implementation. Takes a plan, TDD, or fix proposal and hard-blocks it if SRP, seam, ownership, blast radius, edge cases, or root-cause reasoning are missing. Emits a hardening-report.md that downstream skills (enterprise-plan, enterprise-contract, patch-or-fix, b-deep-debug)…
enterprise-review
Use when enterprise implementation is complete enough for a structured review that separates spec compliance from code quality and classifies drift explicitly.
daily-domain-refactor-runner
Use when inspecting Helpdesk domains for SRP, README, write-boundary, table ownership, or service-migration opportunities and when running one selected domain refactor lane through enterprise gates, PR audits, review loops, and explicit dev merge authorization.
helpdesk-quality-gates
Apply final Claude/Codex consensus quality gates for Helpdesk PRs, goals, skills, and workflows before claiming ready, green, done, merge-ready, or workflow-complete.