Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add bendrucker/claude/plugin install githubWrote 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/bendrucker/claude/copilot)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bendrucker/claude/copilot"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bendrucker/claude/copilot/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/bendrucker/claude/copilot"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bendrucker/claude/copilot.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 | $0.00065 | $0.03007 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.01203 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00601 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00301 |
Grade A, and why
github:copilot scanned grade A 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 today.
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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
Agentic mode passes `--allow-all-tools` and subtracts from it: `--deny-tool write` and `--deny-tool url`, plus `shell(git push)`, `shell(gh:*)`, `shell(curl:*)`, and `shell(wget:*)`. Deny beats allow, so those six are th How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 159 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Copilot Review
A second model reads the diff. The point is a different reviewer rather than a better one: Claude re-reading its own work shares the blind spot that produced it. It has already caught an unchecked-failure defect that two Claude review passes both cleared.
What It Costs
The plan grants a fixed monthly entitlement of AI credits, which --status prints. It resets on the 1st and does not roll over. Four measured facts shape every choice:
- A terra call pays about 3.5 credits before it reads a line of your code, writing 14k tokens of system prompt and tool definitions to cache at 250 credits per million. That is half a median review. A second call is never a rounding error.
- Output costs 6x input and 60x cache_read. Verbose answers run up a bill faster than large diffs.
- Nothing caches between calls. Separate spawns are separate sessions, and each one re-pays its whole prompt at the cache_write rate. Three angles cost three full prompts.
gpt-5.6-lunaprices every token class at exactly a tenth of terra.
Sizing a Review
--status prints the current tier and the bands, and spends nothing. Run it when you are unsure whether a change qualifies.
The tier comes from pace, credits remaining divided by days to reset. Under 25 is constrained, over 60 is abundant, and everything between is normal. The nominal allowance, the entitlement over 31 days, is the yardstick --status prints pace against, and it decides nothing on its own. The tier sets how strict the bar is, never how much to spend. Manufacturing reviews to use up an allotment is the failure mode this guards against, so credits left unspent in a month where every qualifying change got a full review are the right outcome.
| tier | gate |
|---|---|
| constrained | terra only on risk-surface hits, luna one-shot otherwise |
| normal | terra one-shot on gate-worthy changes, skip the rest |
| abundant | terra one-shot on any substantial human change, 3 angles on the risk class, agentic available |
What ships with it
2 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.
- today Changed 2aedb8ec278e
- yesterday Changed 9bde822b27ee
- 11d ago Changed · +2 lines afa2d198043c
- 22d ago Changed · +2 lines 444b9051d7de
- 1mo ago Changed aecdc86d3c2c
- 1mo ago First seen · 155 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 8b06684170bb
github:copilot is a skill published in the GitHub repository bendrucker/claude (18 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 3,007 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review
5-pass structured code review — correctness, security, performance, readability, consistency.
critical-code-reviewer
Rigorously review code or pull requests for correctness, security, accessibility, maintainability, tests, and edge cases. Use when users request a critical code review, want a guided walkthrough of findings, need implementer-facing feedback, or want to prepare, create, or submit a GitHub pull request review.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
pr-review
Comprehensive PR review across six dimensions — cost impact, environment drift, ownership gaps, SOC 2 compliance, deprecated API / version hygiene, and rollback feasibility. Each mode inspects the diff and current file state, reports findings with severity, and recommends concrete fixes. Use when preparing a PR for…
genshijin-review
A compact pull-request review format that writes one actionable finding per line in Japanese or English.
pr-review
Use when the user wants to deeply review a pull/merge request or a local diff — "review this PR", "grill the MR", "stress-test this diff", "deep-dive code review", "code review before merge", or when they name a PR/MR URL, number, branch, commit range (A..B/A...B), tag or SHA. Works on GitHub (gh), GitLab (glab), or a…