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 duthaho/claudekit --skill plan-review-architecturegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/duthaho/claudekitWrote 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/duthaho/claudekit/plan-review-architecture)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/duthaho/claudekit/plan-review-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/duthaho/claudekit/plan-review-architecture/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/duthaho/claudekit/plan-review-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/duthaho/claudekit/plan-review-architecture.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 | $0.00087 | $0.02492 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00997 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00498 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00249 |
Grade A, and why
plan-review-architecture 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 1mo 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 — 199 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Plan Review — Architecture Dimension
Overview
The architecture-dimension reviewer for plan-review. Reads a plan and scores
five concrete sub-dimensions on 0-10: data flow, failure modes, edge cases, test
matrix, and rollback safety. Every score must be paired with a finding citing the
plan task number or section that caused the score. The skill produces a ranked
fix list aligned with plan-review's consolidation step. Used by plan-review's
orchestrator, but invocable directly when only an architectural review is needed.
When to Use
- Invoked by
plan-reviewas one of its two parallel reviewers - The user wants an architectural pass on a plan without the experience review
- A plan has been edited substantially in architectural areas and needs re-scoring
When NOT to Use
- The plan is single-task or single-file (architecture review is overkill)
- You haven't read the underlying spec; architecture findings without spec context produce noise
Process
Step 1: Pre-read
Goal: Build context before scoring.
Inputs: The plan file. Optionally: the spec it's derived from, the relevant codebase area.
Actions:
- Read the spec (if available) for goals, non-goals, constraints, acceptance criteria.
- Read the plan end to end.
- Run
map-codebasementally on the affected area: which files, which entry points, which downstream services or queues.
Output: A short pre-read note: Plan touches <areas>; primary risks I'll watch for: <list>.
Step 2: Score the five sub-dimensions
Goal: Produce 5 scores with cited findings.
Inputs: The plan file plus pre-read notes.
Actions: For each sub-dimension below, score 0-10 and write at least one finding. Findings must cite the plan task number or section.
- Data flow (0-10)
- Is the plan explicit about who owns the data at each step?
- Are reads and writes ordered correctly across services?
- Are eventual-consistency boundaries marked?
- Score 10 = data flow is unambiguous from the plan alone.
- Score 5 = a reader has to guess at one or more transitions.
- Score 0 = data flow contradicts itself or the spec.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 199 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A 90c7197199a0
plan-review-architecture is a skill published in the GitHub repository duthaho/claudekit (97 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 87 tokens to every session and 2,492 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
eval-skills
Audit a project or library of skills for metadata, trigger boundaries, workflow completion criteria, local resource closure, instruction economy, tool scope, effort, and routing evidence. Use before shipping skills, after importing a skill collection, or when a skill triggers too often or not at all.
audit-agents-skills
Audit Claude Code agents, skills, and commands for quality and production readiness. Use when evaluating skill quality, checking production readiness scores, or comparing agents against best-practice templates.
design-patterns
Detect, suggest, and evaluate GoF design patterns in TypeScript/JavaScript codebases. Use when refactoring code, applying singleton/factory/observer/strategy patterns, reviewing pattern quality, or finding stack-native alternatives for React, Angular, NestJS, and Vue.
pr-triage
4-phase PR backlog management with audit, deep code review, validated comments, and optional worktree setup. Use when triaging pull requests, catching up on pending code reviews, or managing a backlog of open PRs. Args: 'all' to review all, PR numbers to focus (e.g. '42 57'), 'en'/'fr' for language, no arg = audit…
eval-rules
Audit Claude Code instruction rules in .claude/rules/ and /.claude/rules/: frontmatter, paths glob validity against real files, symlink load status, and day-to-day usefulness, then update rules with the user. Use for first-time rules setup, rules that apply too often or never, or periodic rules hygiene. Not for Codex…
review-pr
Perform a comprehensive code review of a pull request.