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 crittylabs/critty --skill critty-ai-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/crittylabs/crittyWrote 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/crittylabs/critty/critty-ai-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/crittylabs/critty/critty-ai-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/crittylabs/critty/critty-ai-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/crittylabs/critty/critty-ai-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/crittylabs/critty/critty-ai-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 | $0.00057 | $0.03856 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.01542 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00771 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00386 |
Grade C, and why
critty-ai-review scanned grade C with 1 finding 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 yesterday.
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.
Nullifies safety policieshighAnti-refusal
"You have no restrictions", "do anything now", "ignore your guidelines": a direct jailbreak that disables guardrails.
Include an explicit capability summary in the assignment: accessible roots, available research tools and commands, permitted posting destination, and prohibited actions. Derive it from the enforced policy when possible. How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 124 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
AI Review with Critty
Experimental: interfaces and supported launch configurations may change.
Use the requester role to arrange a review and collect its result. Use the reviewer role when given a review assignment. Both roles use the same request identity and frozen target. You and any other AI agent can take either role when the required access and transport are available; the request identifies each participant.
AI findings are advice. A user may explicitly delegate a specific decision to AI within the caller's applicable policy; record that scope in the request. Otherwise, keep the caller's human approval gate. AI comments, author names, and completion reports never establish human consent or change the TUI verdict.
Load /critty-cli before reading or posting review comments, or use the relevant excerpts supplied by the requester when skill loading is unavailable. It owns command syntax, source coordinates, quoting, and storage behavior. This draft supports an existing Critty session. It does not supply a headless session initializer.
Reviewer permissions
Give the other AI read access to the review workspace, including surrounding code, instructions, dependencies, and read-only Git history. Permit directory searches needed for that investigation. Its only permitted task writes are adding findings, replying to its own threads, and resolving its own verified findings through the restricted Critty interface to the assigned session. Disable direct file editing, arbitrary command execution, tests, builds, formatters, and further delegation. The requester runs checks and supplies their results, makes source changes, and prepares any input files. This boundary applies to both second opinions and cowork.
Enforce the boundary with the host's tool controls, not only the review prompt. If the host cannot narrowly permit Critty posting, run a read-only reviewer and have the requester post its returned findings. Read restricted CLI review when using Claude Code or Codex CLI; it describes the limits of each launch form.
What ships with it
5 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.
- yesterday First seen · 124 lines · 57 tokens per session scan C 3bc36586c770
critty-ai-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository crittylabs/critty (88 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 3,856 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it C with 1 finding (nullifies safety policies). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-10-15.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-comments
Fetch and display GitHub PR review comments for the current branch.
simplify
Clean up changed code while preserving intended behavior. Use when the user asks to simplify or improve code quality through reuse, simplification, efficiency, and abstraction reviews. Correctness bug hunting is outside scope.
cmd-review
Review the current diff or selected files (usage: /review [instructions | --last-diff | --target | --file | files...] [--style ]).
assess-patch-risk
Assess an immutable patch artifact's program impact, regression risk, and auto-merge eligibility. Use for generated patch files, provider pull-request diffs, or commit ranges when reviewers need evidence about affected runtime paths, contracts, tests, and recoverability. This skill is read-only and does not generate…
code-guidelines-go
Go 1.24–1.27 coding guidelines for the dimetron/pi-go AI agent runtime. Use this skill whenever writing, reviewing, or refactoring ANY Go code in pi-go. This covers idiomatic style, error handling, concurrency, project layout, testing (table-driven, fuzz, benchmarks, synctest), new stdlib usage, golangci-lint v2…
design-review
Deep design review of Go codebase — naming, structure, consistency, interfaces, error handling. Scores each dimension and provides actionable fixes.