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 baristaze/swe_guidelines --skill arch-review-contextgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/baristaze/swe_guidelinesWrote 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/baristaze/swe_guidelines/arch-review-context)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/baristaze/swe_guidelines/arch-review-context"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/baristaze/swe_guidelines/arch-review-context/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/baristaze/swe_guidelines/arch-review-context"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/baristaze/swe_guidelines/arch-review-context.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 | $0.00040 | $0.02714 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.01086 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00543 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00271 |
Grade A, and why
arch-review-context 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 12d 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.
This is a copy
89% identical to arch-review-{group} — 14 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 205 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
arch-review-context
Judge the code from one perspective only: the lenses in
../../lenses/context.md. Other perspectives have their own skills; do
not borrow their rules, and do not flag anything a lens in this file
does not name. The guideline itself is at ../../architecture.md when a
lens needs its source read in full. A path that starts with ../ is
read from this skill's folder as realpath resolves it. If either file
is missing, stop and say the installation is incomplete.
This pass covers TenantContext (Stages, Scopes, The Operator Context), Separation of Layers, The Business Layer, The Storage Layer, Infrastructure, The Network Layer, Worker Roles, Telemetry (Correlation Across a Handoff), Cross-Cutting Conventions (Tests): stages, scopes, OperatorContext, authorization, tenancy, provenance.
Input
The arguments name what to review. Read them as the first of these that matches:
- Empty: the current branch's change. The default branch is
origin/HEADwhen set, elsemain, elsemaster. The scope is every file changed since the merge base ofHEADand the default branch (git diff --name-only <base>, committed and uncommitted alike), plus every untracked file git does not ignore (git status --porcelain --untracked-files=all). When there is no merge base (no default branch, a shallow clone, or unrelated histories), the scope is the uncommitted change againstHEADplus the untracked files, and the Scope line says the merge base was not found. In a repository with no commit, it is every file not ignored, listed asalllists them. - The word
all: every file in the repository that git does not ignore, tracked or untracked (git ls-files --cached --others --exclude-standard). Expect this to take a while. - A range (
main..HEAD,main...HEAD): the files that range changes, read as they are at its end. - A commit that
git rev-parse --verify --quiet "<arg>^{commit}"resolves (a SHA, a tag, a branch): the change that commit made, against its first parent. - A path or a glob: every file under it as it is now, untracked files
included
(
git ls-files --cached --others --exclude-standard -- <path>). A path that does not exist is an error; say so and stop. A name that is both a commit and a path reads as the commit; write./<name>for the path.
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.
- 12d ago Changed · +9 lines 38ab23b96815
- 16d ago Changed · +28 lines e27907f20c97
- 24d ago Changed · +39 lines · -63 tokens per session 8ce652afe5fe
- 25d ago Changed · +37 lines · +17 tokens per session 1829c406b54b
- 26d ago First seen · 92 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A 175f9d6de743
arch-review-context is a skill published in the GitHub repository baristaze/swe_guidelines (94 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 2,714 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to arch-review-{group}, differing in 14 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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"…
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…
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…
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…