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 chrisgagne/grounded-forge --skill review-changegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/chrisgagne/grounded-forgeWrote 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/chrisgagne/grounded-forge/review-change)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chrisgagne/grounded-forge/review-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chrisgagne/grounded-forge/review-change/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/chrisgagne/grounded-forge/review-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chrisgagne/grounded-forge/review-change.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 | $0.00083 | $0.01782 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00033 | $0.00713 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00356 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00178 |
Grade A, and why
review-change 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 8d 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 — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review a change, then write the sign-off sheet
This is the factory's review stage (factory/factory/prompts/reviewer.md), run in a conversation instead of the
harness. The person who signs off a change decides by reading evidence, not code, so every finding stands on what the
code shows, and the sheet keeps what was demonstrated apart from what was only asserted.
What this can and can't do
Say this to the person at the start, in a sentence or two:
- This is a review: it reads the change. It doesn't run the project's tests, lock acceptance tests before the build,
run the scanners in a sandbox, or keep a tamper-evident log. Those are the factory's other stages, and they need
the harness (
factory/README.md). - In the factory's tests on ReviewBench, this brief found no more than a plain "review this as a careful senior
engineer" prompt, on Claude or on OpenAI's model; it beat the labs' own review commands only at their default
settings, and OpenAI's
codex reviewand Claude Code with a plain prompt, run together, found as much as anything the factory built. What this workflow adds is the sign-off sheet, not more findings. A second review from the other model family is worth more than a second pass from this one. (The results: https://github.com/chrisgagne/grounded-forge/tree/main/corpus.commons/chrisgagne-agent-built-software/helpers/factory-warranty/calibration/realbugs/results)
1. Gather the change
You need three things. Ask for whichever is missing, once, then go on with what you have and say what's missing on the sheet.
- The change itself. A diff pasted in, a pull request or branch you can read with your own tools, or a repository checkout and the base to compare against. Read the code around the diff, not only the diff.
- What it was meant to do. The story, issue or pull request description, and its acceptance criteria if it has any. With none, review against the description and say on the sheet that there were no criteria to check.
- What's at risk. Ask which of these it touches, or judge it from the diff: authentication or sessions, personal data, a model or agent's output or tool calls, a migration, delete or bulk update, something else that can't be undone, infrastructure.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 113 lines · 83 tokens per session scan A 63b25d0d9966
review-change is a skill published in the GitHub repository chrisgagne/grounded-forge (8 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 83 tokens to every session and 1,782 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 2026-10-22.
Other skills, from other repositories
rag-code-review
When performing code review on a PR, diff, snippet, or "look at this change" request, first consult the corpus for related ADRs, coding standards, prior patterns, and similar files. Grounds review comments in the team's actual decisions instead of generic best practices. Trigger on any review-style request — "review"…
visual-aspect-analyzer
Run this as the FINAL review step once you have finished a UI change you can load in a browser — it is the visual-regression gate, run once at the end (not after every edit), and the change is not done until it reports score: 100. It drives a real browser over the page, auto-detects its relevant elements (no…
summarize-changes
Summarizes uncommitted changes and flags anything risky.
weekly-review
How this household runs its Sunday weekly review.
review-agent
Perform a read-only, defect-first review of a specified code change and return every actionable finding. Use when another agent delegates review of uncommitted changes, a base-branch diff, a commit, or custom review instructions.
mem0-vercel-ai-sdk
Mem0 provider for Vercel AI SDK (@mem0/vercel-ai-provider). TRIGGER when: user mentions "vercel ai sdk", "@mem0/vercel-ai-provider", "createMem0", "retrieveMemories", "addMemories", "getMemories", "searchMemories", "mem0 vercel", "AI SDK provider", "AI SDK memory", or is using generateText/streamText with mem0. Also…