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/drn/dots/rereview-loopnpx skills add drn/dots --skill rereview-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/drn/dotsWhat 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 | $0.00057 | $0.03524 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.01762 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00705 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00352 |
Grade A, and why
rereview-loop 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 3d 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 — 283 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Re-Review Loop
Run /rereview repeatedly: review → fix the findings → re-review → repeat. Stop when all three reviewers approve with zero BLOCKING and zero WARNING findings, when the iteration cap is hit, or when an iteration makes no progress.
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS- Optional. Forms:<branch-or-range>- passed through to/rereviewas its scopemax=<N>- cap the number of review→fix iterations (default 5)severity=blocking- only auto-fix BLOCKING findings (default fixes BLOCKING + WARNING)severity=all- auto-fix BLOCKING + WARNING + INFO- Any combination, space-separated. Example:
/rereview-loop max=3 severity=blocking
Context
- Current branch: !
git branch --show-current - Base ref: !
git branch -r 2>/dev/null | grep -oE 'origin/(main|master)' | head -1 - Git status: !
git status --short - Commits vs main: !
git log origin/main..HEAD --oneline 2>/dev/null | head -20 - Commits vs master: !
git log origin/master..HEAD --oneline 2>/dev/null | head -20
Overview
You are the lead coordinator for an iterative re-review loop. Your job is to drive findings to zero by alternating between review (delegated to /rereview) and fixes (applied here).
Core principle: trust the reviewers. Fix what they flag, do not argue with the verdict to escape the loop. The loop exits when reviewers say it's clean -- not when you decide it's clean.
Hard rules:
- NEVER skip, weaken, or reword reviewer findings to make them "easier to satisfy."
- NEVER mark a finding addressed without making (or consciously rejecting) a code change.
- NEVER cap the loop early just because the remaining findings look minor -- run to the cap or to clean.
- NEVER fix a finding by deleting the test that catches it.
Phase 0: Parse arguments and initialize state
Parse $ARGUMENTS:
max_iterations = 5 (override with max=<N>)
severity_filter = "blocking+warning" (override with severity=blocking | severity=all)
rereview_scope = "" (any non-key=value token; passed to /rereview verbatim)
iteration = 0
prior_blocking_count = -1 (B count from previous iteration; -1 = no prior)
prior_warning_count = -1 (W count from previous iteration; -1 = no prior)
prior_info_count = -1 (I count from previous iteration; -1 = no prior)
last_iteration_committed = false (did the previous iteration produce a commit?)
total_pushbacks = 0 (cumulative pushbacks across all iterations)
total_findings_addressed = 0 (cumulative findings touched, for the pushback rate)
stashed = false (set true if Phase 0 stashes unrelated work)
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 283 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 23b5b689a9b0
rereview-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository drn/dots (23 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 3,524 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…