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 atillab1/embedded-ai-workspace --skill misra-c-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/atillab1/embedded-ai-workspaceWrote 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/atillab1/embedded-ai-workspace/misra-c-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/atillab1/embedded-ai-workspace/misra-c-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/atillab1/embedded-ai-workspace/misra-c-reviewer/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/atillab1/embedded-ai-workspace/misra-c-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/atillab1/embedded-ai-workspace/misra-c-reviewer.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 | $0.00098 | $0.01445 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00049 | $0.00723 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00289 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00145 |
Grade B, and why
misra-c-reviewer scanned grade B with 1 finding 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 11d 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.
Strips warnings and disclaimersmediumAnti-refusal
Omitting safety caveats hides risk from the user and is a common jailbreak preamble.
- **Don't lecture.** If the user pastes code, review it. Save the theory for when they ask. How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MISRA-C:2012 (AMD4) Reviewer
A guided code reviewer for embedded C, aimed at students and hobbyist/junior firmware developers who don't have access to commercial MISRA checkers. Catches the highest-impact rule violations and adds extra checks for ISR (Interrupt Service Routine) safety that pure MISRA does not cover.
What this skill is (and isn't)
- Is: a structured review assistant. Loads rule summaries on demand, walks the user's code, reports violations with rule number, severity, why-it-matters, and a fix.
- Is not: a certified MISRA tool. The official MISRA document is the source of truth for certification work. This skill is for learning and catching real bugs early, not for signing off safety-critical software.
Rule categories (quick reminder)
MISRA splits its guidance into:
- Directives — high-level project-wide guidance (e.g. "all code shall be traceable to
requirements"). Stored in
references/directives.md. - Rules — concrete code-level checks. Each rule has a category:
- Mandatory — must always be followed. No deviation allowed.
- Required — must be followed unless a documented deviation exists.
- Advisory — recommended; deviation is acceptable with judgment.
Workflow
When the user asks for a MISRA review, follow this flow. Don't railroad — adapt to what they actually need.
1. Identify scope
Ask (or infer) what the user wants reviewed:
- A pasted snippet? A file? A whole module?
- Bare-metal / RTOS / Linux userspace? (MISRA is strictest on bare-metal & safety-critical.)
- Is any of it inside an ISR? (If yes, ISR safety check is required — see step 4.)
If the user is a beginner, briefly explain what MISRA is in one paragraph before diving in.
2. Load the right rule reference
Progressive disclosure — only load what you need:
- Default first pass: load
references/rules-essential.md. This covers Mandatory rules plus the highest-bug-yield Required rules (pointer conversions, type model, side effects, uninitialized vars, return-value misuse, pointer arithmetic, dynamic memory). For most student/hobbyist code this is enough. - If the user asks for a thorough review or the code is non-trivial: also load
references/rules-required.md. - If the user asks about style / maintainability or wants the strictest pass: also load
references/rules-advisory.md. - If the question is about project setup, toolchain, or process (not code): load
references/directives.md.
What ships with it
8 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.
- 11d ago First seen · 128 lines · 98 tokens per session scan B addcaba27ce3
misra-c-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository atillab1/embedded-ai-workspace (5 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 98 tokens to every session and 1,445 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (strips warnings and disclaimers). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
tuicr
Use tuicr's review CLI to read and add comments in active TUI review sessions, and launch tuicr in cmux, tmux, Zellij, or Herdr when a user needs an interactive review pane.
liveagent-code-review
Review an open GitHub pull request or the current local branch and working tree with parallel, independent reviewers and evidence-based validation. Use when the user asks for code review, invokes the Code Review action from Git Review, or explicitly mentions this skill.
omh-image-cards
This is a Hermes-native img-summary workflow skill.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
omh-refactor-plan
This is a Hermes-native refactor-plan workflow skill.
omh-verification-gate
This is a Hermes-native verification-gate workflow skill.