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 bgauryy/octocode --skill octocode-roastgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bgauryy/octocodeWrote 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/bgauryy/octocode/octocode-roast)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bgauryy/octocode/octocode-roast"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bgauryy/octocode/octocode-roast/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/bgauryy/octocode/octocode-roast"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bgauryy/octocode/octocode-roast.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00071 | $0.00852 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00426 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
octocode-roast 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 46 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Octocode Roast
Sharp code critique with proof and a repair path.
Flow: TARGET → INSPECT → INVENTORY → AUTOPSY → CHECKPOINT → REDEEM.
Lobby rules
- Target patterns, never people; obey the requested scope and widen only with approval.
- Cite or drop it: every major finding needs an exact anchor, impact, confidence, and repair move.
- Obey explicit user targets first. Only widen to staged/diff/repo scope when no target was given or the user asks for a broader pass.
- Punch the code, not the coder; avoid insults about ability, identity, or experience.
- Never reveal a secret; redact values and use restrained language for security or production-sensitive findings.
- Rank confirmed security, data loss, correctness, and user-impacting performance above style or taste.
- Default to medium tone; use savage/nuclear only when explicitly requested. Do not edit or install before consent.
- Stop when: the target resolves to no files; the checkpoint is reached — important versus redundant findings summarized, nothing edited yet; a repair, a scope widening, or an install needs consent; savage/nuclear tone was not requested; or evidence is pattern-only — report the lead with its confidence instead of asserting exploitability, latency, or outage.
Severity
- Capital offenses: confirmed secret exposure, injection/RCE paths, data loss or corruption, auth/access bypass.
- Felonies: risky security controls, N+1 or hot-path performance damage, brittle async/concurrency, dangerous coupling, change-blocking god functions.
- Crimes: broad type abuse, hidden state, poor errors, missing tests around risky logic.
- Slop: duplicate ceremony, AI-ish verbosity, unclear naming, style residue that slows maintenance.
- Misdemeanors: TODO fossils, console logs, formatting noise. If there are 20+ issues, triage the top 10 by impact and confidence, then separate important findings from redundant noise.
Smart routes — load only what the current step needs
- When you have the target and are ready to inspect it, load
references/roast-playbook.md— the phase-by-phase run through inspection, inventory, autopsy, and the pre-fix checkpoint. - When building the inventory and ranking generic smells, load
references/sin-catalog.md; for language-specific patterns or structural queries loadreferences/language-sins.md— choose evidence appropriate to the code. - When the user picks repairs at the checkpoint, load
references/redemption-flow.md— redeem findings through consent-gated fixes and verification. - When scope spans a monorepo or many categories, load
references/parallel-roasting.md— split the inspection and inventory across workers without duplicating findings. - When research tooling is needed, load
references/octocode.mdand useoctocode-researchif available — verify before joking; mark reduced coverage otherwise. - When improving this skill, prefer
octocode-graph-eval; otherwise loadreferences/improve-loop.md— require an accept/revert criterion.
What ships with it
8 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.
- 12d ago First seen · 46 lines · 71 tokens per session scan A 3b854ae9a3ce
octocode-roast is a skill published in the GitHub repository bgauryy/octocode (932 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 71 tokens to every session and 852 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review
Structured workflow for conducting thorough code reviews. Use when the user asks to review code, a PR, or specific files.
code-quality-principles
Applies KISS, YAGNI, and SOLID principles for clean code with reduced complexity. Use when refactoring or reviewing code for over-engineering.
code-review-web
Review web application code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and stack-specific anti-patterns. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review code, debug a production issue, investigate a build failure, audit security, or check a PR before merging. Triggers on code review, review my code, debug…
generic-fullstack-code-reviewer
Review full-stack code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, input validation, GPU-accelerated animations, and design system consistency. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing pull requests.
OCR Review-to-Approval Loop
Drive a PR to an approved code review by looping OCR's multi-agent review and address steps. Runs /ocr:review then /ocr:address repeatedly until the review verdict is APPROVE, then one final /ocr:address for leftover suggestions, posting every review and every address round to the GitHub PR as comments. Use when the…
unity-reviewer
Use when reviewing Unity C# code changes — checks for runtime-breaking bugs, performance anti-patterns, and maintainability issues. Provides severity-tiered review organized as Critical, Performance, and Style.