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 coo1white/cool-workflow --skill pr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/coo1white/cool-workflowWrote 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/coo1white/cool-workflow/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/coo1white/cool-workflow/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/coo1white/cool-workflow/pr-review.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 | $0.00058 | $0.00330 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00165 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00066 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00033 |
Grade A, and why
pr-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 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.
What it actually says
PR Review
Overview
Review for correctness and release risk before style. Findings lead; summaries are secondary. Treat missing tests and POLA drift as real risks.
Workflow
- Read the diff and identify touched contracts: CLI, MCP,
.cw/state, docs, dist, manifests, tests, release flow, or public package files. - Inspect the surrounding code for behavioral expectations.
- Check whether tests exercise the changed behavior and fail closed.
- Look for stdout chatter, silent fallback, hidden policy in core, untracked generated drift, and accidental public-output changes.
- Report findings first, ordered by severity, with file and line references.
- Include open questions only when they block confidence.
Review Rules
- Do not request cosmetic rewrites unless they hide a bug.
- Do not approve undocumented shipped behavior.
- Do not accept type-only additions without runtime behavior.
- Do not accept
dist/edits without matchingsrc/changes. - For UI work, require screenshots or browser verification.
Output Shape
Use this order:
- Findings
- Open questions
- Test gaps
- Short summary
If there are no findings, say so clearly and name residual risk.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 46 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A eaf66510ac65
pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository coo1white/cool-workflow (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed BSD-2-Clause. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 330 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
adversarial-reviewer
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
trace
Use when encountering bugs, test failures, runtime errors, broken builds, or "this doesn't work" reports. Systematic root-cause analysis before any patch — never blind-patches symptoms. Standalone, ends with a final-integration review of the fix. Trigger with /hyperflow:trace, "debug this", "find the root cause", "why…
agent-inspect
Local evidence debugger and trajectory-test toolkit for TypeScript AI agents. Use when capturing framework-faithful traces, asserting TraceContract/TraceFacts, packaging Evidence v2, or inspecting local runs over read-only MCP (gettracefacts).
dos-self-improve
Run the DOS self-improvement loop: propose a candidate, verify it in an isolated worktree, measure suite/truth/metric gates, and keep only confirmed gains. Use for recursive improvement; use dos-enforce-tune for policy knobs.
test-driven-development
This skill should be used when implementing new features, fixing bugs, or writing new code. Enforces RED-GREEN-REFACTOR.
testing
This skill should be used when the user asks to "write tests", "fix failing tests", "improve test coverage", "add integration tests", "debug a flaky test", or reviews test quality. Provides behavior-focused testing patterns, coverage analysis, and detection of brittle test anti-patterns like implementation coupling…