Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to arklexai/Agent-First-Organization. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/arklexai/Agent-First-Organization/main/.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/arklexai/Agent-First-OrganizationWrote 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/arklexai/agent-first-organization/review-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/arklexai/agent-first-organization/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arklexai/agent-first-organization/review-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/arklexai/agent-first-organization/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arklexai/agent-first-organization/review-pr.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 | $0.00010 | $0.00424 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00170 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00085 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
review-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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Review PR
Review a PR for functional correctness and project conventions. Focus on logic, architecture, and behavior. Formatting issues are caught by CI (ruff, pre-commit) and do not need manual review.
Steps
1. Load PR context
gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --json title,body,files,additions,deletions
gh pr diff $ARGUMENTS
2. Validate PR title and description
- Title matches Conventional Commits regex, under 72 chars
- Description sections meet word minimums (Summary 5w, Description 10w, Tests 10w)
- These are also CI-enforced, so flag only if CI somehow missed them
3. Review functional changes
Focus on:
- Logic correctness: does the code do what the PR claims?
- Edge cases: are error paths handled?
- API changes: are they backwards compatible or properly marked as breaking?
- Security: no hardcoded secrets, no unsanitized input in dangerous contexts
- Performance: any obvious inefficiencies?
5. Check scope
- Single concern per PR
- Flag unrelated changes bundled together
6. Check test coverage
- New behavior should have tests
- Coverage minimum is 45%. Flag large additions without tests.
Output
## Summary
One-sentence assessment.
## Findings
- List issues grouped by severity (blocking, suggestion, nit)
## Checklist
- [ ] Title matches Conventional Commits
- [ ] Description sections meet word minimums
- [ ] Functional correctness verified
- [ ] Tests cover new/changed code
- [ ] No secrets in diff
End with: APPROVED, CHANGES REQUESTED, or NEEDS DISCUSSION.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 68 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 1f707f2decac
review-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository arklexai/Agent-First-Organization (699 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 424 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
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…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…