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 AvinashP/AgentsAtlas --skill atlas-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AvinashP/AgentsAtlasWrote 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/avinashp/agentsatlas/atlas-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/avinashp/agentsatlas/atlas-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/avinashp/agentsatlas/atlas-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/avinashp/agentsatlas/atlas-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/avinashp/agentsatlas/atlas-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 | $0.00023 | $0.00089 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00036 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00018 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00009 |
Grade A, and why
atlas-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Read the canonical review command markdown at commands/atlas/review.md and follow it exactly.
Codex command style:
- Replace any
/atlas:<command>references from canonical docs with$atlas:<command>in Codex responses.
Safety: prioritize correctness and concrete evidence; avoid speculative findings.
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 · 12 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A f3e6a39bd185
atlas-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository AvinashP/AgentsAtlas (7 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 89 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
hunk-release
Prepares, publishes, verifies, and curates Hunk releases. Use for release metadata, benchmarks, tags, publishing, release videos, backports, or recovery.
kn-review
Use when reviewing implemented code before committing — multi-perspective review with severity-based findings.
kn-doc
Use when working with Knowns documentation - viewing, searching, creating, or updating docs.
shadow-verify
Dispatch a parallel adversarial verifier wave after any high-stakes sub-agent investigation (code reviews, audits, findings reports, large refactors, gap analyses) — or whenever a sub-agent asserts a claim with high-confidence language, since confidence is a trigger, not a verdict. Use when sub-agent output will drive…
responding-to-review
Answering review findings: verify each claim before implementing, no performative agreement, per-item fix/reject/defer with evidence, one batched remediation round. Use when responding to review or remediation rounds.
simplify
Discovers incidental complexity, duplication, and dead code in a codebase and produces a ranked, behavior-preserving reduction plan — optionally applying safe changes. Dispatches four parallel read-only discovery lenses (clone detection, dead code, complexity hotspots, wrong abstraction), synthesizes into a…