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 bromso/metapowers --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bromso/metapowersWrote 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/bromso/metapowers/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bromso/metapowers/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bromso/metapowers/review/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/bromso/metapowers/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bromso/metapowers/review.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 | $0.00070 | $0.00653 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00261 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 6d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review
Review the code changes for "$ARGUMENTS" before merging. Check for bugs, security issues, code quality, and test coverage.
See also /coaching:code for a scored coaching report with mentoring feedback to learn from, rather than a merge verdict.
Arguments. $ARGUMENTS may contain the project name and optional flags. Take the first token as <project> and treat --skip-checks as a flag; never include flags in file paths. All paths below use <project>. If --skip-checks is present, skip the prerequisite check and, before writing any artifact, append one line to .metapowers/development/<project>/skip-log.md: - <ISO timestamp> — <skill name> skipped prerequisite check for <artifact file> — reason: <reason or "none given">.
Prerequisites
Read .metapowers/development/<project>/02-build.md if it exists, to understand what was built. If not available, review the current branch diff against main.
Process
-
Gather the changes:
- Read the git diff of all changed files (staged + unstaged, or branch diff vs. main)
- Understand the scope and intent of the changes
-
Check for bugs:
- Logic errors, off-by-one, null/undefined handling
- Race conditions or state management issues
- Missing error handling at system boundaries
-
Check for security issues:
- Input validation at system boundaries (user input, external APIs)
- No secrets, tokens, or credentials in code
- No injection vulnerabilities (SQL, XSS, command injection)
-
Check code quality:
- Naming clarity — do names describe what things do?
- Unnecessary complexity — can anything be simplified?
- Consistency with existing codebase patterns
- No dead code, commented-out code, or TODO placeholders
-
Check tests:
- Do tests exist for new functionality?
- Do tests verify behavior, not implementation?
- Are edge cases covered?
-
Write the artifact to
.metapowers/development/<project>/04-review.mdwith sections:- Summary — what was reviewed and overall assessment
- Issues — categorized by severity (critical, important, minor)
- Strengths — what's well done
- Recommendations — suggested improvements
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 58 lines · 70 tokens per session scan A 4ac5a7572048
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository bromso/metapowers (3 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 70 tokens to every session and 653 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 2026-10-21.
Other skills, from other repositories
challenge
Use before a root-cause, done/verified claim, irreversible action, or 2nd-time fix reaches the owner (APEX or plain conversation); also fires at every eLicit/Verify gate. Not for code correctness (use sniper).
code-quality
Use when validating code quality after modifications -- SOLID compliance, DRY duplication, linter errors, architecture violations. Do NOT use for functional verification (run verification FIRST, then code-quality).
elicitation
Use when an expert agent self-reviews and self-corrects code after the Execute phase, before sniper validation (BMAD-METHOD elicitation techniques).
react-effects-audit
Use when auditing React or Next.js components for unnecessary or unsafe useEffect usage -- detects 9 anti-patterns from "You Might Not Need an Effect".
pr-summary
Summarize current pull request with diff, comments, and changed files. Use when reviewing PRs or before merging.
sniper-check
Use when validating code quality after modifications. Runs sniper agent in isolated forked context for clean, fast validation.