Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add crenshawdev/cadence/plugin install cadenceWrote 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/crenshawdev/cadence/cad-decision-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/crenshawdev/cadence/cad-decision-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/crenshawdev/cadence/cad-decision-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/crenshawdev/cadence/cad-decision-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/crenshawdev/cadence/cad-decision-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00042 | $0.00616 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00308 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00123 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00062 |
Grade A, and why
cad-decision-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
This is a manual, on-demand entry point only - it never auto-fires and there
is no review-trigger wiring for it. Durability (cad-context's ## Durable decisions filter) names candidates worth this deeper pass; picking one and
invoking this skill is the user's call, not a mechanical handoff.
<execution_context> @${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/cadence-core/workflows/decision-review.md </execution_context>
-
Run the workflow end-to-end: refute (the review subsystem's reviewer resolution), then adjudicate (Context7 + codebase grounding, per-objection ruling and amendments), then the qualitative cost report.
-
Present the per-objection rulings, groundings, and amendments - or, on a clean pass, the grounded load-bearing claims, never a bare "no findings"
- plus which reviewers ran, and the tier/effort that reached the
cross-model arm (the
cad-reviewerarm resolves neither: no routing cell gives it a model, and its effort is frontmatter-frozen). Do NOT auto-apply any amendment - this is a review, not an edit; the user decides what to change and does it themselves.
- plus which reviewers ran, and the tier/effort that reached the
cross-model arm (the
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 55 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 024a5508a4e4
cad-decision-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository crenshawdev/cadence (4 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 616 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
vibe-review
Use when a PR is open and CI green - dispatches a fresh subagent for two-stage code review (spec compliance then quality), posts findings to the GitHub PR as review comments with severity classification.
pr
Comprehensive PR/issue review - analyzes architecture, tests, identifies unrelated changes mixed in, drafts review comment or issue comment. Use when user asks to review a PR, check a PR, look at PR changes, or comment on an issue.
release
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release"…
pr-comment
Post friendly review comments to a GitHub PR — prepare locally, preview, then submit as atomic review. Use when: posting code review comments, giving PR feedback, sending inline suggestions. Not for: reading existing reviews (use load-pr-review), creating PRs (use create-pr), PR status (use pr-summary).
procoder
Work like a senior developer in a repository governed by procoder: run the commit gate before calling anything done, format and lint through the binary, and drive the spec, plan, todo, backlog, and sprint chain in .procoder/. Use this skill when the repository contains a .procoder/ directory or an AGENTS.md naming…
babysit-pr
Author-side PR lifecycle babysitter and companion to review-pr. Use when the user wants to tend an existing GitHub PR through CI, review threads, description sync, mergeability, auto-fixes, or asks to babysit a PR with or without an existing manifest.