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 agentmods add skills/bananasjim/openplan-skill/openplan-reviewnpx skills add BANANASJIM/openplan-skill --skill openplan-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/BANANASJIM/openplan-skillWrote 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/bananasjim/openplan-skill/openplan-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bananasjim/openplan-skill/openplan-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bananasjim/openplan-skill/openplan-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00107 | $0.00760 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.00380 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00152 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00076 |
Grade A, and why
openplan-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 6d 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 — 57 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
OpenPlan Review
Use this after $openplan-core to review automated agent work without becoming another ungoverned agent. The review must be evidence-backed, read-only by default, preserve dual-surface separation when present, and remain independent of any one platform's enforcement implementation.
Core Rule
Do not approve, merge, commit, rewrite, or fix the work under review. Inspect, verify, classify, and report. If the user explicitly asks for fixes after the review, treat that as a separate task.
Review Flow
- Define scope from the user request and durable artifacts such as files, diffs, reports, logs, transcripts, or git metadata when available.
- Load only context needed for review: request, changed artifacts, declared goal/intent/spec/plan if available, and any local project rules that directly constrain the artifact.
- Identify what layer is being reviewed: goal/intent, design/rationale, plan/spec, implementation, review report, or generated skill/plugin surface.
- Run safe deterministic checks only when they are available and proportionate. Treat checks as evidence sources, not approval gates.
- Apply the invariant checklist in
references/invariants.md. - Produce findings using
references/output-contract.md. - Optionally validate the report shape:
python3 scripts/validate_review_report.py <report.md>
YOLO/Auto Rules
- Prefer fail-closed reporting over guessing.
- Ask no broad clarification questions during unattended review; instead record
BLOCKEDwith the exact missing artifact. - Never use destructive commands (
git reset --hard, branch checkout, deleting working directories, cleanup of untracked files). - Do not rely on chat memory for state. Re-read durable artifacts where available.
- Do not treat passing tests as approval. Tests are evidence, not a decision.
- Do not treat reviewer non-blocking findings as automatic fix permission.
- Do not create human decisions. List them under
Non-Decisions.
Severity Model
What ships with it
6 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.
- 6d ago First seen · 57 lines · 107 tokens per session scan A ce651fb3d03d
openplan-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository BANANASJIM/openplan-skill (4 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 107 tokens to every session and 760 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.