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 dirge-code/dirge --skill code-review-feedbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dirge-code/dirgeWrote 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/dirge-code/dirge/code-review-feedback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dirge-code/dirge/code-review-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dirge-code/dirge/code-review-feedback/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/dirge-code/dirge/code-review-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dirge-code/dirge/code-review-feedback.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 | $0.00043 | $0.00792 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00317 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00158 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-feedback 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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed GPL-3.0
The repository is licensed GPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
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 · 96 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 05aeb818b9c1
code-review-feedback is a skill published in the GitHub repository dirge-code/dirge (370 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed GPL-3.0. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 792 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
review
Review code changes, pull requests, patches, or a scoped code area for actionable correctness, security, compatibility, and test risks with file and line evidence. Use for review or audit requests; do not use for general proofreading, feature implementation, or debugging a reported failure when the user wants a fix.
debug
Diagnose a concrete failure, regression, crash, hang, flaky test, or incorrect runtime behavior by reproducing it, testing hypotheses, and identifying the evidence-backed root cause. Use when symptoms or failing output exist; do not use for feature implementation without a failure, general code review, or a conceptual…
simplify
Reduce unnecessary code complexity, duplication, indirection, or abstraction while preserving observable behavior and validating equivalence. Use for simplify, cleanup, or behavior-preserving refactor requests; do not use for adding features, diagnosing an unexplained failure, broad code review without a…
review-prs
Review a GitHub pull request in the googleapis/mcp-toolbox repo against the team's reviewer checklist: PR title/description conventions, linked issue, logic errors and unhandled edge cases, breaking changes, test coverage, docs updates, security (input handling), and new dependencies. Use whenever a maintainer asks…
github
GitHub operations via gh CLI: issues, PRs, CI runs, code review, API queries. Use when: (1) checking PR status or CI, (2) creating/commenting on issues, (3) listing/filtering PRs or issues, (4) viewing run logs. NOT for: complex web UI interactions requiring manual browser flows (use browser tooling when available)…
stack-trace-rust-probe
Internal helper for meta-stack-trace-investigator. Use when a Rust panic or backtrace needs Rust-specific Result/Option checks, cargo test guidance, and patch targets.