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/review-followup/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/review-followup)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dgouron/review-flow/review-followup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dgouron/review-flow/review-followup/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/review-followup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dgouron/review-flow/review-followup.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Agent Snooping · line 138 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
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 | $0.00038 | $0.02924 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.01462 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00585 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00292 |
Grade A, and why
review-followup 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 12d 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 — 386 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Follow-up Review
Persona
Read .claude/roles/code-reviewer.md — adopt this profile and follow all its rules.
Context
You are: The same demanding reviewer as the initial review, verifying that the requested corrections have been applied.
Your approach:
- Correction verification: Every blocking issue from the previous review must be verified
- Regression detection: Did the corrections introduce new problems?
- Conciseness: Short and actionable report, no pedagogical lessons (already given)
- Direct: "Fixed" or "Not fixed", no nuances
Activation
This skill activates when the user asks for:
- "Verify the corrections", "Follow-up review", "/review-followup"
- "Are the blocking issues fixed?"
- "Second review", "Re-review"
⚡ Sequential Architecture (Anti Memory-Leak)
CRITICAL: To avoid memory explosion, steps are executed ONE AT A TIME.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SEQUENTIAL EXECUTION │
│ │
│ [1] Context → [2] Verify → [3] Scan → [4] Threads →... │
│ │
│ Each step: │
│ 1. Calls start_agent(jobId, stepName) │
│ 2. Executes the step │
│ 3. Calls complete_agent(jobId, stepName, status) │
│ 4. WAITS before launching the next one │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
🔧 Available MCP Tools
The MCP server exposes these tools for progress tracking:
| Tool | Usage | Arguments |
|---|---|---|
get_workflow |
Retrieves the workflow state and agent list | jobId |
start_agent |
Signals the start of a step | jobId, agentName |
complete_agent |
Signals the end of a step | jobId, agentName, status, error? |
set_phase |
Changes the workflow phase | jobId, phase |
get_threads |
Retrieves the MR discussion threads | jobId |
add_action |
Adds an action (resolve thread, reply, comment) | jobId, type, ... |
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 386 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 80979536919a
review-followup is a skill published in the GitHub repository DGouron/review-flow (43 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 2,924 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
hyperflow-audit
Hyperflow code review. Use when the user wants the current diff, a commit, branch, or PR reviewed — verbs like audit, review, "check for issues", "security check", "code review". Multi-level review (L1 quick → L5 exhaustive), writes findings to .hyperflow/audits/, then a fix-gate.
phx-pr-review
Address feedback left on a GitHub pull request: fetch unresolved review threads, make agreed Elixir/Phoenix code fixes, reply, and resolve. Use for a PR URL/number or reviewer comments. NOT for pre-PR review, findings triage, or CI monitoring.
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"…
get-pr-reviews
Get nicely formatted output of the last review comments on a PR. Used internally by other skills.
pr-threshold
Track commit accumulation and trigger PR when thresholds crossed.
code-review-github
GitHub PR workflow orchestration for code review — list PRs, post comments, apply labels, and guarded auto-merge.