Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to deephaven/deephaven-mcp. 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/deephaven/deephaven-mcp/main/.agents/skills/skill-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/deephaven/deephaven-mcpWrote 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/deephaven/deephaven-mcp/skill-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/deephaven/deephaven-mcp/skill-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/deephaven/deephaven-mcp/skill-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/deephaven/deephaven-mcp/skill-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/deephaven/deephaven-mcp/skill-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 | $0.00084 | $0.02520 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.01008 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00504 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00252 |
Grade A, and why
skill-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 1mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 90 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review an Agent Skill or AGENTS.md
Review like a senior engineer. Every finding must answer three questions in concrete terms: what is wrong, what is better, why the change is worth its cost. Be conscious of suggestions that do not serve a purpose.
Wraps ref-skill-authoring-standards (structural standards), ref-skill-effectiveness (content standards), and ref-agents-md-curation (when the target is AGENTS.md). Effectiveness and composition are co-headline audits; structure is the supporting audit.
The findings report has three subsections — Architecture, Effectiveness, Structure — so the user can act on each axis independently. Architecture findings extract or merge skills; effectiveness findings rewrite descriptions and bodies; structural findings are surgical fixes.
Steps
-
Identify the target. Is this a skill file (
.agents/skills/<name>/SKILL.md) orAGENTS.md? Branch on the answer:- Skill: apply
ref-skill-authoring-standards+ref-skill-effectiveness. AGENTS.md: applyref-agents-md-curation+ref-skill-effectiveness.
- Skill: apply
-
Composition audit (Architecture). Two non-negotiable refactoring questions; each gets an explicit answer in the report.
- Should material in this skill move into a sub-skill? Triggers: a section covering a discrete sub-concern that a given invocation rarely needs; a section paraphrased in another skill; a section conceptually independent with its own trigger.
- Should material in a sub-skill move out of it? Triggers: the sub-skill is referenced by exactly one parent, or has no independent trigger. Size is not a trigger on its own — a short skill that encodes one real gotcha is a good skill.
- Are the children correct? Skills this one invokes must each contribute their concern. Drift signal: an
Apply <skill>line that does not carry weight in the body. - Are the parents correct? Skills that invoke this one must each have a real reason to. Drift signal: a parent that wraps in name only.
- Synthesis: would an agent invoking this skill waste tokens reading content it does not need (extract), or take an extra hop for content it always needs (merge)?
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 90 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A 4f1060bbb6bf
skill-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository deephaven/deephaven-mcp (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 2,520 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
ring:mapping-feature-relationships
Mapping how features relate and phasing the work: categorizing PRD features, grouping them into domains, charting cross-feature journeys, dependencies, and integration points, and defining the binding Phases that plan.md mirrors one-to-one at Gate 7. Gate 2 of ring:planning-large-features; runs after…