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 codebygarv/Ai-skills --skill pr-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/codebygarv/Ai-skillsWrote 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/codebygarv/ai-skills/pr-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/codebygarv/ai-skills/pr-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/codebygarv/ai-skills/pr-reviewer.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00484 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00242 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00048 |
Grade A, and why
pr-reviewer 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 7d 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 — 38 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
Review a pull request the way a senior engineer would: assess whether the change accomplishes its stated intent, is appropriately scoped, and doesn't introduce bugs, architectural drift, or maintainability regressions — then organize findings by severity like a real PR review.
When to Use
- Reviewing a complete PR/diff (multiple files, a coherent change set) rather than a single function.
- Before approving or requesting changes on a real PR.
Differs from Code Reviewer: Code Reviewer is line/function-level quality; PR Reviewer additionally evaluates scope, intent-match, and whether the PR is the right size and shape as a unit of change.
What to Analyze
- Intent match — does the diff actually do what the PR title/description claims, completely?
- Scope — is the PR doing one coherent thing, or mixing unrelated changes that should be separate PRs?
- Correctness — bugs, logic errors, edge cases across the changed files, including interactions between changed files.
- Test coverage — are the changed code paths covered by new or existing tests? Is anything risky shipped untested?
- Backward compatibility / migration safety — does this break existing callers, APIs, or data assumptions?
- Maintainability — does this diff make the codebase easier or harder to work in going forward?
Output Format
- One-line summary of what the PR does and whether it appears to accomplish it.
- Findings grouped by severity: Blocking → Should Fix → Nit → Question (things worth asking the author, not necessarily wrong).
- Each finding references the specific file and, where possible, the line or hunk.
- A final verdict: Approve / Approve with comments / Request changes, with the one or two things that most drive that verdict.
Avoid
- Reviewing files that weren't actually changed in the diff.
- Blocking on nits — reserve "Blocking" for things that are actually wrong.
- Approving without a clear verdict statement — every review should end in an explicit recommendation.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 7d ago First seen · 38 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A fbfd6e75e040
pr-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository codebygarv/Ai-skills (25 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 484 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
bun-api
Bun runtime API reference for TypeScript scripts. Covers Bun.serve() HTTP/HTTP/2 server with routes and WebSockets, fetch() transport options, Bun.file(), Bun.write(), Bun.$() shell, Bun.spawn(), Bun.Glob, Bun.env, bun:sqlite, Bun.sql() for PostgreSQL/MySQL via DATABASEURL, Bun.s3 for S3-compatible storage, Bun.redis…
bun-cli
Bun CLI reference for package management, script running, testing, bundling, and compilation. Covers bun install/add/remove/update, bun run, bun test, bun build, bunx, bun patch, bun audit fix, bun dedupe, bun prune, bun why, bun pm, bun repl, bunfig.toml, bun.lock, workspace catalogs, isolated installs and the global…
deps-upgrade
Validate JavaScript/TypeScript dependency upgrades after an interactive or manual update. Establish the real delta from git, detect peer/engine/type conflicts, extract breaking changes, migrations and adoptable features from release notes, assess held-back or seemingly unused packages, and run verification gates.…
git-pr
PR and MR workflows for GitHub (gh) and GitLab (glab). Creation, review comment handling, thread resolution, review state queries, merging, cost-aware bot review rounds (GitHub: Copilot, CodeRabbit), and Copilot code review configuration (rulesets, custom instructions, billing). Use when creating PRs/MRs, addressing…
git-project
GitHub Projects (v2) setup and management via gh CLI + GraphQL: organize a repo's issues into epics with native sub-issues, drive a board Status flow (Todo -> In Progress -> Done), set Project Priority, classify with native issue Types (Task/Bug/Feature) instead of labels, scope work with milestones (incl. resolving…
git-ci
CI/CD status queries for GitHub Actions (gh) and GitLab CI (glab). Check pipeline status, failing jobs, workflow runs, job logs, and merge readiness. Use when checking CI status, debugging build failures, viewing job logs, watching pipeline progress, or configuring gh/glab CI read-only allowlists. Not for PR workflows…