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 Dong90/oh-my-taiyiforge --skill taiyi-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Dong90/oh-my-taiyiforgeWrote 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/dong90/oh-my-taiyiforge/taiyi-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dong90/oh-my-taiyiforge/taiyi-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dong90/oh-my-taiyiforge/taiyi-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/dong90/oh-my-taiyiforge/taiyi-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dong90/oh-my-taiyiforge/taiyi-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, 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 MCP Rug Pull · line 17 npx commands without a version suffix (e.g. @1.0.0) create a rug-pull risk if the upstream server is compromised and publishes a malicious update.Fix: Pin the version: npx @scope/[email protected]
- medium MCP Rug Pull · line 180 npx commands without a version suffix (e.g. @1.0.0) create a rug-pull risk if the upstream server is compromised and publishes a malicious update.Fix: Pin the version: npx @scope/[email protected]
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 | $0.00026 | $0.02807 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.01404 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00561 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00281 |
Grade A, and why
taiyi-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 13d 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 — 233 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
taiyi-review — 合并前评审
进入本阶段前请优先读
.taiyi/changes/<slug>/PHASE-CONTEXT.md（~500 tokens），不要全量加载上游工件。
框架集成
本阶段使用以下框架：
| 框架 | 用途 | 何时加载 |
|---|---|---|
| Harness | 阶段门禁与推进（status → continue --approver；legacy：npx taiyi complete） |
全程 |
| GStack | review — 使用 GStack review 做 diff 安全分析 |
Round 1 FR 步骤前（可选） |
| OMO | 作为 review 门控的工作流入口 | 全程 |
Superpowers / OpenSpec / Spec-Kit 在本阶段不涉及。
前置门禁（Pre-flight）
0.1 上游确认
- test 阶段已过关（TEST.md 存在，测试全部通过）
- README.md、CLAUDE.md 等文档的 Diff 已确认
- 当前 git 分支对比 base 的完整 Diff 可读
0.2 Profile 判定
| Profile | REVIEW.md 要求 |
|---|---|
full |
4 rounds 完整评审（diff/架构/测试/文档）+ 修订循环 + ⭐ 总体评分 |
api/ui |
同 full |
lite |
简化为 3 rounds（跳过架构评审）+ 修订循环 + ⭐ 评分 |
spike/micro |
简化到 1 round（代码可读性）+ ⭐ 评分 |
nano |
跳过 |
0.3 前置检查清单
- TEST.md 存在且测试全部通过
- git diff 与 base 分支的差异已清楚（
git diff base-branch..HEAD --stat） - 无未提交的改动
步骤
工件契约
| 层 | 路径 | 职责 |
|---|---|---|
| 语义真源 | review.json |
Zod（src/schemas/review.ts） |
| 生成视图 | REVIEW.md |
hbs（src/templates/review.hbs） |
| 流程 | 本 Skill | 4 rounds、修订循环、⭐ 评分 |
工作流：review-loop 机器审查 → 更新 json findings → render <slug> review → status → continue --approver "名"。
详见 docs/taiyi/artifact-contract.md。
json 字段（Zod 摘要）
| 字段 | 要求 |
|---|---|
title |
评审标题 |
findings |
severity / description / file / line / resolved |
code_quality |
可选；⭐ 各维度 1–5 |
test_coverage |
可选；层覆盖摘要 |
blocking_items / suggestion_items |
可选 |
verdict / summary |
可选；合并门槛与总结 |
除更新 Finding 状态外，不要手改 reviewer 生成的 REVIEW.md 结构；结构化数据以 review.json 为准。
写作指引（填入 json，render 生成 REVIEW.md）
除了修改实现外，不要修改 reviewer agent 生成的 REVIEW.md 内容。
1. Round 1 — 功能性 FR（Diff 角度）
审查 git diff 中的每个改动（逐文件），检查：
- 逻辑正确性（边界、竞态、类型安全）
- 与 AC 的一致性（每段代码能不能追踪到某条 AC？）
- 错误处理完整（每条错误路径有 check / catch）
- Scope 管控（改动是否超出 TASK.md write_files？）
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.
- 13d ago First seen · 233 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 7bf63e8c0ef8
taiyi-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Dong90/oh-my-taiyiforge (888 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 2,807 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
review
Use when the user wants code assessed rather than changed — "review PR 88", "is this branch ready to merge?", "look over my changes", "any problems with this diff?", "give me a code review", "what do you think of this PR?", "sanity-check this branch", "ship it?". Applies to a pull request or the current branch when…
fix
PRFlow's code-review reception skill (formerly receiving-code-review), used by the review-and-fix loop and available directly. Use when addressing review feedback already posted on a pull request — verifying findings before applying them — as distinct from /prflow:review-and-fix, which runs the review itself and then…
review-and-fix
Use when the user wants problems in a pull request or the current branch both found AND corrected — "review my changes and fix what's wrong", "clean up whatever the review turns up", "address the review feedback on this branch", "tidy this PR up before merge", "find and fix the issues here". Requires explicit fix…
docs-bootstrap-internal
Use when a codebase has no structured developer documentation yet and needs it built from scratch — "we have no docs at all", "set up internal docs for this repo", "the docs directory is a mess, start over", "create developer documentation for this codebase" — including an empty or disorganized docs directory or a…
docs-release-notes
Use when a change needs a user-visible release-note, changelog, or changeset entry — "add a release note", "add a changeset for this", "what goes in the changelog?", "write up what shipped", "note this for the next release" — or when finalizing a branch whose customer-visible features, bug fixes, or UI changes should…
docs-sync-internal
Use when code changes on the current branch need matching internal or developer documentation — "update our internal docs", "the architecture docs are stale after this change", "document what I just changed", "do the dev docs still match the code?" — or as a pre-push check that developer docs track the code. Narrower…