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 bengous/claude-code-plugins/plugin install agents-bridgeWrote 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/bengous/claude-code-plugins/critique)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bengous/claude-code-plugins/critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bengous/claude-code-plugins/critique/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/bengous/claude-code-plugins/critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bengous/claude-code-plugins/critique.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 | $0.00075 | $0.01143 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00457 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00229 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00114 |
Grade A, and why
critique scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 14d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Cross-model critique
A second pair of eyes from a non-Claude model (Codex) on a proposal Claude just made — a design, refactor, API, or fix. Goal: a genuine cross-model check. Validate what holds up, challenge what is weak, surface a better path when one exists. Not a rubber stamp, not reflexive contrarianism.
When to use
- Claude (this instance or another) proposed a solution and you want it pressure-tested before committing.
- You said "not bad, right?" and actually want the honest answer.
- A decision has real forks and one outside viewpoint would de-risk it.
NOT for reviewing local git changes — use /agents-bridge:adversarial-review.
It reads the git diff; a proposal usually lives in the conversation, not on
disk, so a diff-based review would miss it (and may review unrelated
working-tree files instead).
Workflow
-
Create the run directory. Use the printed path literally in every later step: shell variables do not survive between Bash calls.
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/codex-run.ts" new critique -
Write the prompt — grounded — to
<dir>/prompt.mdwith the Write tool. Start it with the instruction block below, verbatim, then add: the proposal verbatim, the problem it solves, any constraints, the questions you most want challenged, an explicit list of the real repo file paths it touches or depends on, and — if the user gave extra focus with the invocation — a final## Extra focus from the usersection carrying it verbatim. Grounding in actual code is the one thing that makes the critique useful; skip it and the review drifts into generic advice.You are giving a CRITICAL SECOND OPINION on a proposal made by another AI (Claude), at the user's request. Read everything below, including any "Extra focus from the user" section, then read the real repo files it lists before judging. Then: (1) briefly confirm what is sound; (2) challenge only what is genuinely weak — correctness bugs, wrong assumptions, missed edge cases, or a simpler/safer/more idiomatic option — grounding every point in the actual code; (3) where a better path exists, describe it concretely and explain WHY (tradeoffs); (4) if it is good as-is, say so plainly and do not invent problems. End with a one-line verdict: SHIP / ADJUST / RECONSIDER.
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.
- 14d ago Changed · -9 lines e481246739a7
- 1mo ago Changed · +13 lines 6a0d5e8a6f21
- 1mo ago First seen · 87 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 737f45d725fb
critique is a skill published in the GitHub repository bengous/claude-code-plugins (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 1,143 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
html-ppt-hermes-cyber-terminal
OpenDesign + BYOK: choosing and wiring your own model, hands-on — cost, quality, and the routing decision. Built as a decision-grade AI literacy deck for engineers, IT, applied-AI teams.
development
An index of programming guidance for Python, Go, Rust, TypeScript, Java, C++, and shell scripting.
tencent-docs
A Tencent Docs assistant for creating, reading, editing, organizing, importing, and exporting online documents, spreadsheets, presentations, diagrams, and forms.
wechat-search
Search WeChat Official Account articles using OpenClaw's web search, Tavily API, and web fetch capabilities with compliance-focused design.
debugging-executions
Debug failed or wrong-output workflow executions using executions tools. Load when the user reports execution failures, unexpected node output, empty parameter values after a successful run, or a node showing a red or failed expression error. Also load when a live run you started for the user fails with an error from…
flow-next-tracker-sync
Project a flow-next spec to a tracker issue (Linear, GitHub, GitLab, Jira) and reconcile two-way. Use when asked to sync to a tracker. NOT plan-sync.