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 cookjohn/teammcp --skill submit-for-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cookjohn/teammcpWrote 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/cookjohn/teammcp/submit-for-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cookjohn/teammcp/submit-for-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cookjohn/teammcp/submit-for-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 | $0.00035 | $0.00606 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00303 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00121 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00061 |
Grade A, and why
submit-for-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
Submit Work for Review
Instructions
-
Parse arguments
- Extract from
$ARGUMENTS:title— short description of what is being submittedreviewer— the agent or role who should review (e.g., "CTO", "CEO", agent name)channel(optional) — channel to post the review request inproject_id(optional) — associated project for state updates
- If title or reviewer is missing, ask the user.
- Extract from
-
Create or update the review task
- Call
list_tasksto check if a review task for this work already exists. - If it exists, call
update_taskto set its status to "in-review" and update the description. - If it does not exist, call
create_taskwith:- Title: the provided title
- Status: "in-review"
- Assignee: the reviewer
- Description: summary of what is being submitted and what to review
- Call
-
Notify the reviewer
- If a channel is specified, call
send_messageto the channel with the review request, including:- What is being submitted
- Task ID for reference
- What kind of feedback is expected
- Always also call
send_dmto the reviewer directly with the review details.
- If a channel is specified, call
-
Request state approval (if applicable)
- If a
project_idis provided:- Call
request_approvalto request a state transition (e.g., status from "in-progress" to "in-review"). - This notifies the state owner that approval is needed.
- Call
- If a
-
Confirm submission
- Output a summary:
- Task ID created/updated
- Reviewer notified
- Approval requested (if applicable)
- Next steps (wait for reviewer feedback)
- Output a summary:
$ARGUMENTS
/submit-for-review "<title>" <reviewer>/submit-for-review "<title>" <reviewer> --channel <channel>/submit-for-review "<title>" <reviewer> --project <project_id>- Example:
/submit-for-review "API authentication module" CEO --channel general --project proj-123
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 · 54 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A c7b0e7a65ea7
submit-for-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository cookjohn/teammcp (53 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 606 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
recipe-create-meet-space
Create a Google Meet meeting space and share the join link.
workthreads
SpecStory Workthreads - a weekly work-thread rollup across a team's repos from SpecStory coding histories (any agent - Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and more). It groups the window's sessions into threads of work per project and labels each new / open / recently closed, so a lead sees what shipped, what is still…
atmos-config
Atmos root configuration: atmos.yaml discovery, precedence, deep merging, basepath, imports, minimal bootstrap, and routing to narrower Atmos skills.
story-readiness
Validate that a story file is implementation-ready. Checks for embedded GDD requirements, ADR references, engine notes, clear acceptance criteria, and no open design questions. Produces READY / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED verdict with specific gaps. Use when user says 'is this story ready', 'can I start on this story', 'is…
autotask-creator
Rules for automation CRUD from the group-chat commander. The commander does not call mutation tools and does not edit cloud/autotasks files directly. It emits one or more top-level ... containers in its final text; the bus parses and applies them after the turn.
monorepo-management
Master monorepo management with Turborepo, Nx, and pnpm workspaces to build efficient, scalable multi-package repositories with optimized builds and dependency management. Use when setting up monorepos, optimizing builds, or managing shared dependencies.