Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/main/.agents/skills/review-changes/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harnessWrote 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/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/review-changes)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/review-changes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/review-changes/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/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/review-changes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/review-changes.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00204 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00082 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00041 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00020 |
Grade A, and why
review-changes 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 2mo 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.
What it actually says
review-changes
这是 Claude Command 工作流 的 Codex 原生发现入口。执行前必须完整读取并遵守
Command 工作流 事实源。
参数映射：
- 参数提示：
[作用域或分支名]。 - 显式调用
$review-changes ...时，移除只用于选择 Skill 的$review-changestoken，其余用户输入作为$ARGUMENTS。 - 由语义匹配触发时，完整的当前用户任务输入作为
$ARGUMENTS。 - 必需参数缺失时，遵守源 Command 的停止条件，不猜测输入。
不要在本文件复制或修改工作流正文。
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 20 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A a25baede58fe
review-changes is a skill published in the GitHub repository bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness (115 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 204 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
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"…
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…
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…