Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to compozy/skeeper. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/compozy/skeeper/main/.agents/skills/cy-fix-reviews/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/compozy/skeeperWrote 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/compozy/skeeper/cy-fix-reviews)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/compozy/skeeper/cy-fix-reviews"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/compozy/skeeper/cy-fix-reviews.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 | $0.00077 | $0.00823 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00411 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00165 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
cy-fix-reviews 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.
This is a copy
86% identical to cy-fix-reviews — 30 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 51 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Fix Reviews
Execute the review remediation workflow in a strict sequence. The review files already exist and define the full scope for the run.
Required Inputs
- The scoped issue files listed in
<batch_issue_files>. - The PRD review round directory and issue-file frontmatter.
- The repository verification workflow required by
cy-final-verify.
Workflow
-
Gather round context.
- Read the scoped issue file frontmatter to understand the provider, round number, and issue status/severity. If multiple issue files are in scope, verify their
provider,pr,round, andround_created_atvalues agree. - Read
<batch_scope>to identify the PRD name, review round, code files in scope, and conditional flags such as auto-commit.
- Read the scoped issue file frontmatter to understand the provider, round number, and issue status/severity. If multiple issue files are in scope, verify their
-
Read and triage the scoped issue files.
- Read every listed issue file completely before editing code.
- Update each issue file frontmatter
statusfrompendingtovalidorinvalid. - Record concrete technical reasoning in
## Triage: state why the issue is valid or invalid, identify the root cause if valid, and outline the intended fix approach.
-
Fix valid issues completely.
- Fix issues in severity order: critical first, then high, medium, low. This ensures the most impactful fixes land even if the batch is interrupted.
- Implement production-quality fixes for every
validissue in scope. - Add or update tests when behavior changes or regressions are possible. Test file edits are always in scope when they validate a fix.
- Keep code changes constrained to the files listed in
<batch_scope>code files. If a fix absolutely requires touching a file not listed there, limit the change to the minimum needed and document why in the issue file's## Triagesection. - Do not refactor, clean up, or improve code that is unrelated to the issues being fixed.
-
Close out issue files correctly.
- For a
validissue, set frontmatterstatus: resolvedonly after the code and verification are done. - For an
invalidissue, document why it is invalid and then set frontmatterstatus: resolvedonce the analysis is complete.
- For a
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 · 51 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 497f176db54a
cy-fix-reviews is a skill published in the GitHub repository compozy/skeeper (85 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 823 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to cy-fix-reviews, differing in 30 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.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…
github-contributor
End-to-end playbook for shipping high-quality pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — discovery, CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size check, minimal-diff implementation, PR description with AI-assisted disclosure, conflict resolution, and post-submission maintainer interaction. Use whenever creating…
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…
write-pr
Reference standards for writing pull request titles and descriptions in the tldraw repository, plus the pre-flight comment sweep over the diff. Use as supporting guidance when another skill or workflow needs PR content standards, not as the user-facing create/update PR workflow.