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 doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator --skill review-implementation-craftgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestratorWrote 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/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/review-implementation-craft)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/review-implementation-craft"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/review-implementation-craft/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/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/review-implementation-craft"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/review-implementation-craft.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- 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 | $0.00010 | $0.00933 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00466 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00187 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
review-implementation-craft 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 10d 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 — 64 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Craft axis for a multi-axis implementation review. The harness may run you at either the per-phase implementation gate or the feature-level Final Review gate.
You run as a read-only, audit-only reviewer. Inspect the supplied plan or roadmap context, progress or prior feedback, verification evidence, and repository diff. Do not run commands, tests, builds, linters, or scripts. Audit only the files and evidence already produced by implementation.
Output Files
| Artifact | Path | Requirement | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
review-feedback.md |
{helper_dir}/review-feedback.md |
required | structured review feedback markdown with findings, suggestions, and verdict |
Axis Scope
Own only intrinsic code quality:
- naming clarity and local idiom
- cohesion, simple design, and appropriate abstraction
- contextual error handling
- code structure that is understandable and maintainable
- tests as code quality when their structure obscures behavior
Consult the relevant language guidelines and Knowledge Base before judging local conventions.
At the Final gate, judge Craft over the whole assembled feature and cumulative cross-repo diff. Do not limit review to a single implementation iteration.
Code Smells
Each smell reads what it is → how to fix; match it against the diff:
- Mysterious Name — a function, variable, or type whose name doesn't reveal what it does or holds. → rename it; if no honest name comes, the design's murky.
- Duplicated Code — the same logic shape appears in more than one hunk or file in the change. → extract the shared shape, call it from both.
- Feature Envy — a method that reaches into another object's data more than its own. → move the method onto the data it envies.
- Data Clumps — the same few fields or params keep travelling together (a type wanting to be born). → bundle them into one type, pass that.
- Primitive Obsession — a primitive or string standing in for a domain concept that deserves its own type. → give the concept its own small type.
- Repeated Switches — the same
switch/if-cascade on the same type recurs across the change. → replace with polymorphism, or one map both sites share. - Shotgun Surgery — one logical change forces scattered edits across many files in the diff. → gather what changes together into one module.
- Divergent Change — one file or module is edited for several unrelated reasons. → split so each module changes for one reason.
- Speculative Generality — abstraction, parameters, or hooks added for needs the spec doesn't have. → delete it; inline back until a real need shows.
- Dead or Unreachable Code — code introduced by the change has no execution path or caller, or can never run. → request its removal unless the supplied plan or roadmap explicitly requires keeping it.
- Message Chains — long
a.b().c().d()navigation the caller shouldn't depend on. → hide the walk behind one method on the first object. - Middle Man — a class or function that mostly just delegates onward. → cut it, call the real target direct.
- Refused Bequest — a subclass or implementer that ignores or overrides most of what it inherits. → drop the inheritance, use composition.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 10d ago First seen · 64 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A a9fd45fdfb2b
review-implementation-craft is a skill published in the GitHub repository doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator (103 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 933 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
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.