Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to delorenj/mcp-server-trello. 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/delorenj/mcp-server-trello/main/.agent/skills/bmad-editorial-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/delorenj/mcp-server-trelloWrote 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/delorenj/mcp-server-trello/bmad-editorial-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/delorenj/mcp-server-trello/bmad-editorial-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/delorenj/mcp-server-trello/bmad-editorial-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/delorenj/mcp-server-trello/bmad-editorial-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/delorenj/mcp-server-trello/bmad-editorial-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 | $0.00014 | $0.00247 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00099 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00049 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00025 |
Grade A, and why
bmad-editorial-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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- bmad-editorial-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
What it actually says
Merged into bmad-review. Invoke the bmad-review skill on the same content with the structure and prose lenses — both, structure first, so prose runs on top of the structure findings — unless the caller asked for a structure-only or prose-only review, in which case pass only that lens. Pass through any also_consider areas, and forward this skill's resolved [workflow] fields as pre-resolved values — but only those that resolved to something, since an empty value here means no legacy override exists and bmad-review's own default should stand: reader_type, style_guide, review_guidance, output_preferences, persistent_facts, activation_steps_prepend, activation_steps_append, on_complete, and review_output_path as the report path. Present the findings in the legacy shape: the two-pass findings table | Pass | Original Text | Revised Text | Changes | with the purpose/audience read above it and, when the structure pass ran, the reduction summary below it — and no other lens's output.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 7 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 3b939876b497
bmad-editorial-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository delorenj/mcp-server-trello (446 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 247 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-16.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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…