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 CiscoDevNet/essentials --skill pr-address-commentsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/CiscoDevNet/essentialsWrote 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/ciscodevnet/essentials/pr-address-comments)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ciscodevnet/essentials/pr-address-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ciscodevnet/essentials/pr-address-comments.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00074 | $0.01876 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00938 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00375 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00188 |
Grade A, and why
pr-address-comments 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 yesterday.
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 — 270 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Address Comments
Read a remote PR's review comments, implement fixes, then reply to and resolve the addressed threads.
Phase: Fix
Quick start
/pr-address-comments https://github.com/<owner>/<repo>/pull/123
/pr-address-comments 103
Prerequisites
- GitHub CLI (
gh) — authenticated and with access to the repository - The current directory must be a git repo (
.git/present)
Limitations
- GitHub's REST API does not have a "resolve thread" endpoint. Threads must be resolved via the GraphQL API using
resolveReviewThread. - The
minimizeCommentmutation hides comments but does NOT resolve threads — do not use it for this purpose. - Reply endpoint:
POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/commentswithin_reply_tofield. The older/repliessub-resource returns 404.
Instructions
Step 1: Resolve the PR
Parse the user's input:
- If a full URL is provided (e.g.,
https://github.com/org/repo/pull/123), extract the owner, repo, and PR number directly. - If only a number is provided, determine the remote from
.git:
# Get the GitHub owner/repo from the git remote
gh repo view --json nameWithOwner --jq .nameWithOwner
Step 2: Fetch PR Details and Review Comments
# Get PR metadata
gh pr view <NUMBER> --json title,body,state,headRefName,files
# Get inline review comments (these are the ones to address)
gh api repos/<OWNER>/<REPO>/pulls/<NUMBER>/comments
Parse each comment for:
id— the comment ID (needed for responding later)path— the file pathline/original_line— the line numberbody— the reviewer's feedback
Step 3: Get Unresolved Thread IDs (GraphQL)
Fetch thread metadata upfront so you can resolve them later:
gh api graphql -f query='
query {
repository(owner: "<OWNER>", name: "<REPO>") {
pullRequest(number: <NUMBER>) {
reviewThreads(first: 100) {
nodes {
id
isResolved
comments(first: 1) {
nodes {
databaseId
path
body
}
}
}
}
}
}
}' --jq '.data.repository.pullRequest.reviewThreads.nodes[] | select(.isResolved == false) | {threadId: .id, commentId: .comments.nodes[0].databaseId, path: .comments.nodes[0].path, body: .comments.nodes[0].body}'
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- yesterday First seen · 270 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A 6e723c3f9e7e
pr-address-comments is a skill published in the GitHub repository CiscoDevNet/essentials (7 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 1,876 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
triage-contributor-pr
Triage open pull requests from external contributors to prisma/prisma and produce a per-PR verdict with evidence. Use when a maintainer asks to triage, evaluate, assess, or review the queue of incoming contributor PRs, to decide whether a fork PR is safe to run CI on, to check whether a PR is in scope for its version…
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.
review-triage-phase
Produces canonical review actions from fetched review state and renders action markdown. Use when the user wants only triage/action-planning for the review-framework workflow.
compiler-commit
Use when you want to verify compiler changes and commit with the correct convention. Runs tests, lint, and format, then commits with the [compiler] or [rust-compiler] prefix.
reviewing-personhog-protocol
The full review process for personhog coordination-protocol changes — leases, fencing, handoffs, supervisors, failure budgets, warming, and changelog semantics. Use before pushing or requesting review on any personhog protocol changeset, when asked for an exhaustive or careful review of personhog code, and after any…
understand-pr
Guided interactive PR review — understand the history and context before forming opinions.