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 argos-ci/argos-javascript --skill argos-pr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/argos-ci/argos-javascriptWrote 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/argos-ci/argos-javascript/argos-pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/argos-ci/argos-javascript/argos-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/argos-ci/argos-javascript/argos-pr-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/argos-ci/argos-javascript/argos-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/argos-ci/argos-javascript/argos-pr-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk warn
- 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 26 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 58 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00065 | $0.01461 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00584 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00292 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00146 |
Grade A, and why
argos-pr-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 2mo 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 — 105 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Argos PR Review
Argos is a visual testing platform: each CI build captures screenshots and
compares them to a baseline, producing per-snapshot diffs. A build with
changes-detected is waiting for a human (or you) to decide whether each change
is intentional, a regression, or a flaky capture.
Treat the Argos build as one input to the PR review, never the sole source of truth. Infer the intended UI change from the PR title, description, linked issue, and code diff first, then use Argos to confirm the rendered result matches.
Tooling & auth
Drive Argos through the argos CLI — load the argos-cli skill for the token
model and flags. In short: build get / build snapshots need a project token
(ARGOS_TOKEN/--token); submitting a review or comment needs a personal
access token (--token / argos login). Always use --json when parsing, and
never print token values. If no PAT is available, give the user your conclusion
and evidence instead of posting — the CLI can't submit the review.
Workflow
-
Inspect the build —
argos build get <ref> --json. Decide from status:Status Meaning / next step accepted/no-changesAlready approved / no visual diff — no review needed pending/progressNot ready — stop and report it can't be reviewed yet changes-detectedNeeds a decision — fetch snapshots rejected/error/aborted/expiredDon't approve until the cause is understood -
Fetch what changed —
argos build snapshots <ref> --needs-review --json. For each diff inspecturl(diff mask),base.url(before),head.url(after), andhead.metadata, plus the flakiness signalstest.metricsand, on a change,change.occurrences/change.ignored(used in step 3).
What ships with it
3 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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 105 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 8b0d03c66c96
argos-pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository argos-ci/argos-javascript (19 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 1,461 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
adk-go-self-review
Review an ADK Go change the way a maintainer will — a fresh-context pass over the whole diff, five lenses (correctness and tests, scope, simplicity, style, adk-python parity), and the mutation check that proves your tests pin the change. Use before opening a PR, before any later push that changes code, and when asked…
adversarial-reviewer
Stress-test a code change for concrete correctness defects, unsafe assumptions, and failure modes. Use when the user explicitly asks for an adversarial review, a deep bug hunt, or to tear a change apart, or to check your own change before submitting it. Do not use for ordinary review, style feedback, or general…
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
plugin-review
Review plugin quality with tiered checks and dependency scoping. Use for PR and pre-release audits.
audit-ci
Run and analyze Elements cold CI performance profiles and propose evidence-backed build, test, lint, and dependency-graph improvements. Use whenever asked to profile or benchmark pnpm run ci, rerun ci:profile, create a CI performance audit, compare CI timings, find bottlenecks or the completion path, investigate a CI…