Rulesync is a command-line tool that generates configuration for different AI development tools from a shared set of rules. Developers use it to keep instructions, commands, MCP settings, ignore files, subagents, and skills consistent across coding agents. Catalogue skills support workflows built around Rulesync.
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/dyoshikawa/rulesync/review-pr-litenpx skills add dyoshikawa/rulesync --skill review-pr-litegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dyoshikawa/rulesyncWrote 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/dyoshikawa/rulesync/review-pr-lite)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dyoshikawa/rulesync/review-pr-lite"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dyoshikawa/rulesync/review-pr-lite.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00683 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00342 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00137 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr-lite 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 5d 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 — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
target_pr = the user's request
If target_pr is not provided, use the PR of the current branch.
Important: Do Not Switch the Local Branch
- Do NOT check out, switch, or otherwise move the local branch (e.g.,
git checkout,git switch,gh pr checkout). - To inspect the PR's changes, use
gitandghcommands that read remote state without moving the working tree. For example:gh pr view $target_prto read PR metadata and description.gh pr diff $target_prto read the diff.gh pr view $target_pr --json filesorgh apito list changed files.git fetch origin pull/<PR_NUMBER>/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr-<PR_NUMBER>andgit diff origin/main...origin/pr-<PR_NUMBER>if a local read-only ref is needed.
Step 1: Gather PR Context
Run the following in parallel:
- Get the PR description and metadata via
gh pr view $target_pr(do not check out the PR locally). - Get the PR diff via
gh pr diff $target_pr. - If needed, inspect changed files individually for deeper context using
gh/gitcommands (e.g.,gh api,git show) — without switching the local branch.
Step 2: Review the Changes
Review the PR directly in this skill without calling any subagents.
Focus on both of the following:
-
Code Review
- Bugs or behavioral regressions
- Incorrect assumptions or edge cases
- Missing or weak tests
- Maintainability issues that could cause near-term problems
-
Security Review
- Injection risks
- Auth/authz mistakes
- Secrets exposure
- Unsafe file, network, shell, or deserialization behavior
- Dependency or configuration changes that could weaken security
Step 3: Report Findings
Integrate all findings into one review result. Please output the PR number in the result so that the user can easily find the PR.
Reporting Rules
- Assign a severity level to each finding: low, mid, high, or critical.
- Assign a sequential number to each finding (e.g., #1, #2, #3, ...).
- Present findings first, ordered by severity.
- If no findings are discovered, explicitly state that no findings were found.
- Keep the summary brief and focused on risk and testing gaps.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 71 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 4aa2e3fdee19
review-pr-lite is a skill published in the GitHub repository dyoshikawa/rulesync (1,385 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 683 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
snip
You are an expert at writing declarative YAML filters for snip, a CLI proxy that reduces LLM token consumption by filtering shell output.
opensrc
Fetch dependency source code to give AI agents deeper implementation context. Use when the agent needs to understand how a library works internally, read source code for a package, fetch implementation details for a dependency, or explore how an npm/PyPI/crates.io package is built. Triggers include "fetch source for"…
building-agents
Use when building or restructuring an LLM agent — provider adapter, tool calling, structured output, RAG, agent loop, eval gate, cost routing, tracing, MCP server — model-agnostic across OpenAI/Anthropic/Gemini/OSS so a model swap is a config change. NOT vector-store SQL alone (that is postgresdb) or service…
agent-eval
Use when measuring whether an LLM or agent system actually got better and gating merges on it: golden sets, fixing an inflated LLM-as-judge, scoring RAG (faithfulness, contextual recall) or agent trajectories (tool correctness, completion), or picking an eval framework. NOT building the agent loop, tools or RAG…
prompt-engineering
Use when one prompt must give the same right answer across reruns, models, and pasted-in hostile input: forcing a fixed schema, picking the few-shot set, ordering the prompt blocks, or the inline cases you run while tuning. NOT the agent loop, tools, or retrieval (that is building-agents), NOT a standing CI eval…
linked-intent-dev
Guide for linked-intent development (LID). Consult for ALL code changes. Walks changes through a mode-aware six-phase workflow (HLD → LLD → EARS → intent-narrowing edge audit → tests-first → code) with mandatory stops between each phase. Bugs walk the arrow like any other change — no short-circuit. Enforces cascade…