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 dryvist/claude-code-plugins --skill trigger-ai-reviewsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dryvist/claude-code-pluginsWrote 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/dryvist/claude-code-plugins/trigger-ai-reviews)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dryvist/claude-code-plugins/trigger-ai-reviews"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dryvist/claude-code-plugins/trigger-ai-reviews.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 | $0.00065 | $0.00925 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00463 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00185 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
trigger-ai-reviews scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 112 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Trigger AI Reviews
Trigger Claude, Gemini, and/or Copilot reviews on a PR with a single invocation.
Usage
/trigger-ai-reviews # Trigger all 3 AIs on current branch's PR
/trigger-ai-reviews 42 # Trigger all 3 AIs on PR #42
/trigger-ai-reviews 42 claude # Trigger only Claude
/trigger-ai-reviews 42 gemini # Trigger only Gemini
/trigger-ai-reviews 42 copilot # Trigger only Copilot
/trigger-ai-reviews 42 all # Explicitly trigger all 3 AIs
Step 1: Resolve PR Context
OWNER=$(gh repo view --json owner --jq '.owner.login')
REPO=$(gh repo view --json name --jq '.name')
# If PR_NUMBER not provided, get from current branch
PR_NUMBER=${PR_NUMBER:-$(gh pr view --json number --jq '.number' 2>/dev/null)}
Verify the PR exists and is open:
STATE=$(gh pr view "$PR_NUMBER" --json state --jq '.state')
[ "$STATE" = "OPEN" ] || { echo "PR #$PR_NUMBER is $STATE — only open PRs can be reviewed"; exit 1; }
Step 2: Trigger Claude
Post a comment mentioning @claude:
gh pr comment "$PR_NUMBER" --body "@claude review this PR"
Expected: Claude Code bot picks up the mention and posts a review.
Step 3: Trigger Gemini
Post the Gemini slash command:
gh pr comment "$PR_NUMBER" --body "/gemini review"
Expected: Gemini Code Assist bot responds with a review.
Step 4: Trigger Copilot
Request Copilot as a reviewer via the GitHub API:
gh api \
--method POST \
"/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/pulls/${PR_NUMBER}/requested_reviewers" \
-f "reviewers[]=copilot-pull-request-reviewer[bot]"
Important limitation: Copilot can only be requested once per PR. If Copilot has already submitted a review, this API call will return an error — that is expected behavior. See references/ai-triggers.md for details.
Step 5: Report Results
After all steps, report clearly:
AI Review Triggers — PR #{NUMBER}
✅ Claude — comment posted (@claude review this PR)
✅ Gemini — comment posted (/gemini review)
✅ Copilot — reviewer requested via API
OR
⚠️ Copilot — request failed (already reviewed or not installed)
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 112 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 1001404a996c
trigger-ai-reviews is a skill published in the GitHub repository dryvist/claude-code-plugins (3 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 925 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
contribute
Complete contribution workflow using git-town. Create branch → commit → PR → ship. Preflight at every step.
code-review-loop
Use when opening a PR for review or when receiving review feedback. Activate for keywords like "code review", "PR review", "request review", "review feedback", "address comments", "reviewer said". Covers both ends of the loop: preparing a reviewable PR and acting on feedback rigorously. Always engage with every…
no-mistakes
Validate committed feature-branch changes through the no-mistakes pipeline: intent, rebase, review, test, docs, lint, push, PR, and CI. Use when the user asks to run no-mistakes, ship safely, validate before pushing, or gate a change before it reaches upstream.
core-workflow
Detailed development workflow patterns, checklists, and standards. Auto-loads for complex tasks, planning, debugging, testing, or when explicit patterns are needed. Contains session protocols, git conventions, security checklists, testing strategy, and communication standards.
debug-systematic
Systematic 4-phase debugging methodology for complex, intermittent, or mysterious issues. Use when investigating bugs, race conditions, or unexplained failures.
auto-claude
Autonomous multi-agent coding with git worktree isolation, QA validation, and memory. Use for complex features requiring autonomous implementation.