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 agentmods add skills/doodledood/manifest-dev/check-prnpx skills add doodledood/manifest-dev --skill check-prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/doodledood/manifest-devWrote 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/doodledood/manifest-dev/check-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/doodledood/manifest-dev/check-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/doodledood/manifest-dev/check-pr.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00074 | $0.03125 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.01563 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00625 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00313 |
Grade A, and why
check-pr 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 6d 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 — 191 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
check-pr
This skill turns the activating session into a read-only PR lifecycle inspector. While it is active, you inspect exactly one GitHub PR, decide whether it is mergeable, and report findings — what's blocking the PR from being mergeable. You never mutate PR or repo state and you never press the merge button. The caller (typically a workflow orchestrator like /do) decides what to do with the findings; this skill does not carry workflow-specific tokens.
Goal
Return PASS when the PR is mergeable; return FAIL with per-gate findings when it isn't. Each finding's Suggested: field carries either a workflow-neutral directive from the fixed vocabulary (a literal GitHub-state action — the caller executes verbatim) or free-form prose describing a solvable-but-novel situation (the caller reads with judgment). Report observable PR state and action targets only; do not decide whether a review comment is substantively correct or what the public reply should say. Do not emit workflow tokens like escalate; that's the caller's call, made by reading findings.
Inputs
- PR URL — canonical
github.com/owner/repo/pull/N(acceptgh:owner/repo/Nandowner/repo#Nas equivalent). - Branch name — the PR's head branch (optional; derivable from the PR).
- Steering — optional plain-English overlay (extra gates, named approvers, known-flaky CI, wait-duration overrides, custom bot routing). Parse with judgment; no schema. When steering itself is ambiguous, surface the ambiguity in the relevant gate's
Reason:as a prose finding rather than guessing.
Canonical gates (the baseline)
The PR is ready when each gate holds:
- PR exists — exactly one open PR on the named branch.
- CI green — required checks pass on the current head commit.
- Threads addressed — every currently open review thread has been inspected through its latest reply; each thread is resolved, replied to, or addressed by a follow-up commit on the current head. Human-authored threads can only be resolved by the original author. Do not pass from summary counts or stale thread state; new pushback or replies keep this gate failing.
- Description in sync — PR description reflects the current diff's intent.
- Mergeable — GitHub's composite mergeability signal says the PR can merge. Non-GREEN FAILs the gate.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 191 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A 24e4880b4521
check-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository doodledood/manifest-dev (72 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 3,125 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
great_cto
Use when the CTO describes a feature, task, or project goal. Orchestrates the full SDLC pipeline automatically based on project type.
skeptical-triage
Reusable 3-round self-challenge + arbiter pattern for filtering false positives from findings/verdicts. Use when the cost of a false-positive gate block exceeds the cost of 4 extra LLM turns.
vertical-real-estate
Residential-proptech domain knowledge so architect / pm aren't naive when speccing real-estate products (listings, lead-crm, transaction-coordination, property-mgmt). Codifies MLS/IDX reality, listing status lifecycle + syndication canonical-source, long-cycle lead nurture, transaction-coordination as the high-pain…
anti-patterns
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that greatcto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident).
product-economics
Does this product make money at a price someone will pay? Forces contribution margin, a price with a stated basis, and a bottom-up market size — each number labelled measured / assumed / unknown, so a guess can never be read as a calculation.
cost-model
Standardized cost-estimation framework for greatcto plans. Forces explicit LLM cost, infra cost, human-supervision time, and the (defensible) human-equivalent comparison. Output format is parsable by the board's /api/cost path — must follow exactly.