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 chhoumann/t3-pstack --skill make-pr-easy-to-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/chhoumann/t3-pstackWrote 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/chhoumann/t3-pstack/make-pr-easy-to-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chhoumann/t3-pstack/make-pr-easy-to-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chhoumann/t3-pstack/make-pr-easy-to-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/chhoumann/t3-pstack/make-pr-easy-to-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chhoumann/t3-pstack/make-pr-easy-to-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 | $0.00057 | $0.00496 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00198 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
make-pr-easy-to-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 3d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
92% identical to make-pr-easy-to-review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Make PR Easy to Review
Prepare a PR so a reviewer can quickly understand the intent, important files, and risk. The default goal is reviewability without behavior changes.
Workflow
- Resolve the target PR from the user-provided URL or current branch.
- Inspect commits, diff size, changed paths, generated files, and PR description.
- Identify reviewability issues: noisy commits, stale description, unrelated changes, mixed mechanical and logic changes, missing tests, or unclear reviewer entry points.
- Propose a plan before rewriting history or force-pushing.
- Apply safe improvements, then verify the tree or diff still matches the intended code.
History Cleanup
Only rewrite history when the user asks for it or agrees to the plan. Before rewriting:
gh pr view <PR> --json title,headRefName,baseRefName,state,commits
git fetch origin <headRefName> <baseRefName>
ORIGINAL_TREE=$(git rev-parse origin/<headRefName>^{tree})
Good commit groupings usually follow dependency order:
- Schema/storage or generated API definitions.
- Core logic.
- Wiring and integration.
- UI or surface behavior.
- Tests.
After rewriting, verify content identity:
echo "Original tree: $ORIGINAL_TREE"
echo "Current tree: $(git rev-parse HEAD^{tree})"
git diff origin/<headRefName> --stat
Do not push if the tree changed unintentionally.
Reviewer Guidance
When code behavior should stay untouched, prefer PR description and review notes:
- Add a TL;DR that matches the actual diff.
- Separate core files from generated or mechanical files.
- Call out risky behavior changes, migration order, rollout plan, and test coverage.
- Link issue trackers, dashboards, or design docs when they explain intent.
Guardrails
- Never hide meaningful behavior changes inside "cleanup".
- Do not bypass hooks unless the user explicitly asks.
- If the PR is too large to make reviewable with notes, recommend splitting instead of polishing around the problem.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 60 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A e8da0d4a85b7
make-pr-easy-to-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository chhoumann/t3-pstack (190 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 496 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to make-pr-easy-to-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
github-pr-workflow
Prepare a GitHub pull request from a feature branch — branch hygiene, commit shape, title/body, verification notes, screenshots for UI work, and replies to review comments.
review-delta
Review only changes since last commit using impact analysis. Token-efficient delta review with automatic blast-radius detection.
work-unit-commits
Plan commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
git-pr-workflows-git-workflow
Guide changes through code checks, testing, commits, and pull request preparation. Use when coordinating a complete Git workflow and verifying readiness for collaboration.