Skills is a collection of reusable instructions for recurring software-development tasks across Apple platforms, GitHub, SwiftUI, React, macOS packaging, debugging, refactoring, and multi-agent reviews. It is for developers and coding agents that need focused workflows for engineering and code-maintenance work. The catalogue entries are the sixteen skills included in the repository.
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 Dimillian/Skills --skill review-swarmgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Dimillian/SkillsWrote 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/dimillian/skills/review-swarm)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dimillian/skills/review-swarm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dimillian/skills/review-swarm/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/dimillian/skills/review-swarm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dimillian/skills/review-swarm.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk pass
- 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 | $0.00079 | $0.01412 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00706 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00282 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00141 |
Grade A, and why
review-swarm 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 11d 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 — 169 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Swarm
Review a diff with four read-only sub-agents in parallel, then have the main agent filter, order, and summarize only the issues that matter. This skill is review-only: sub-agents do not edit files, and the main agent does not apply fixes as part of this workflow.
Step 1: Determine Scope and Intent
Prefer this scope order:
- Files or paths explicitly named by the user
- Current git changes
- An explicit branch, commit, or PR diff requested by the user
- Most recently modified tracked files, only if the user asked for a review and there is no clearer diff
If there is no clear review scope, stop and say so briefly.
When using git changes, choose the smallest correct diff command:
- unstaged work:
git diff - staged work:
git diff --cached - mixed staged and unstaged work: review both
- explicit branch or commit comparison: use exactly what the user requested
Before launching reviewers, read the closest local instructions and any relevant project docs for the touched area, such as:
AGENTS.md- repo workflow docs
- architecture or contract docs for the touched module
Build a short intent packet for the reviewers:
- What behavior is meant to change
- What behavior should remain unchanged
- Any stated or inferred constraints, such as compatibility, rollout, security, or migration expectations
If the user did not state the intent clearly, infer it from the diff and say that the inference may be incomplete.
Step 2: Launch Four Read-Only Reviewers in Parallel
Launch four sub-agents when the scope is large enough for parallel review to help. For a tiny diff or one very small file, it is acceptable to review locally instead.
For every sub-agent:
- give the same scope and the same intent packet
- state that the sub-agent is read-only
- do not let the sub-agent edit files, run
apply_patch, stage changes, commit, or perform any other state-mutating action - ask for concise findings only
- ask for: file and line or symbol, issue, why it matters, recommended follow-up, and confidence
- tell the sub-agent to avoid nits, style preferences, and speculative concerns without concrete impact
- tell the sub-agent to send findings back to the main agent only
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 169 lines · 79 tokens per session scan A da643e533939
review-swarm is a skill published in the GitHub repository Dimillian/Skills (3,951 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 79 tokens to every session and 1,412 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.