Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to DGouron/review-flow. 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/DGouron/review-flow/master/.claude/skills/e2e/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DGouron/review-flowWrote 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/dgouron/review-flow/e2e)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dgouron/review-flow/e2e"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dgouron/review-flow/e2e/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/dgouron/review-flow/e2e"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dgouron/review-flow/e2e.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00044 | $0.01383 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00553 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00277 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00138 |
Grade A, and why
e2e 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 2mo 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 — 241 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Playwright E2E Testing Guide
Persona
Read .claude/roles/code-reviewer.md — adopt this profile and follow all its rules.
Activation
This skill activates for:
- Creating a new e2e test
- Debugging a flaky test
- Testing a critical feature (complete API workflow)
Architecture
src/tests/e2e/
├── fixtures/
│ └── test-data.ts # Test data (webhooks, payloads, etc.)
├── specs/
│ ├── setup.ts # Server setup (run once)
│ └── <context>/
│ └── <feature>.spec.ts # Tests per feature
└── utils/
└── test-helpers.ts # Helpers (API calls, server setup)
Commands
| Command | Usage |
|---|---|
yarn e2e |
Run all tests |
yarn e2e:debug |
Debug mode with inspector |
yarn test:e2e:report |
View HTML report |
Workflow: Create a New Test
1. Identify the Context
specs/
├── setup.ts # Setup (do not touch)
├── webhook/ # Webhook endpoint tests
├── review/ # Review workflow tests
└── health/ # Health check tests
2. Write the Test
// specs/webhook/github-webhook.spec.ts
import { test, expect } from "@playwright/test";
test.describe("GitHub Webhook", () => {
test("should accept a valid pull request event", async ({ request }) => {
const response = await request.post("/webhooks/github", {
headers: {
"content-type": "application/json",
"x-github-event": "pull_request",
"x-hub-signature-256": "sha256=valid-signature",
},
data: {
action: "opened",
pull_request: {
number: 42,
title: "feat: add new feature",
head: { ref: "feat/new-feature" },
base: { ref: "main" },
},
repository: { full_name: "org/repo" },
sender: { login: "developer" },
},
});
expect(response.status()).toBe(200);
});
test("should reject an invalid payload", async ({ request }) => {
const response = await request.post("/webhooks/github", {
data: {},
});
expect(response.status()).toBe(400);
});
});
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 241 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 10196e940b06
e2e is a skill published in the GitHub repository DGouron/review-flow (44 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 1,383 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review
Reviews code for bugs, security issues, and best practices.
adversarial-reviewer
Stress-test a code change for concrete correctness defects, unsafe assumptions, and failure modes. Use when the user explicitly asks for an adversarial review, a deep bug hunt, or to tear a change apart, or to check your own change before submitting it. Do not use for ordinary review, style feedback, or general…
trace
Use when encountering bugs, test failures, runtime errors, broken builds, or "this doesn't work" reports. Systematic root-cause analysis before any patch — never blind-patches symptoms. Standalone, ends with a final-integration review of the fix. Trigger with /hyperflow:trace, "debug this", "find the root cause", "why…
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
brooks-health
Combined codebase health dashboard that scores a project across all four quality dimensions — PR quality, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — in a single pass, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user wants an overall quality assessment, asks "how healthy is this codebase?", "run all…
brooks-test
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow…