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 entireio/skills --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/entireio/skillsWrote 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/entireio/skills/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/entireio/skills/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/entireio/skills/review/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/entireio/skills/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/entireio/skills/review.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 | $0.00047 | $0.01691 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00846 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00338 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00169 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 — 221 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review
Review code changes on the current branch by first reading checkpoint transcripts to understand the intent behind each change, then auditing the actual diff for issues. This produces an intent-aware review that catches mismatches between what the developer wanted and what the code actually does.
Response Format
Begin the first response to this skill invocation with the line:
Entire Review:
followed by a blank line, then the content.
- Apply the header to the first response of the invocation only. Do not re-print it on follow-up turns within the same invocation.
- Do not include the header on error or early-exit responses (e.g. "not a git repository", "no commits found between branch and base").
Rules
- This is a read-only audit. Do not modify any files during the review.
- Always show a scope banner before findings so the user knows what is being reviewed.
- If checkpoint context is unavailable, still perform the review using only the diff and commit messages. Clearly state that the review lacks intent context.
- Group findings by file. Within each file, order by severity (Critical > High > Medium > Low).
- Every finding must include a concrete suggestion or explanation, not just flag the issue.
- After presenting findings, ask the user if they want a fix plan. Do not auto-fix.
- Do not review generated files, lock files, or binary files unless the user explicitly asks for them.
Process
1. Verify environment
Run entire version to check if the CLI is available. If it is not installed, note that
the review will proceed without checkpoint intent context (degraded mode).
2. Detect base ref
Find the mainline branch to diff against. Try these refs in order and use the first that exists:
git rev-parse --verify origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null
git rev-parse --verify origin/main 2>/dev/null
git rev-parse --verify origin/master 2>/dev/null
git rev-parse --verify main 2>/dev/null
git rev-parse --verify master 2>/dev/null
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 Changed 481c497242db
- 10d ago First seen · 221 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 6699a29a2767
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository entireio/skills (219 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 1,691 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
agent-watchdog
Use when asked to watch, babysit, audit, review, compare, or fix another agent's work from a Codex session ID, Claude Code session/transcript, chat/thread link, PR, branch, log, or pasted run summary. Monitor until the other agent is done or blocked, reconstruct what the user asked, independently investigate the same…
comet-verify
Comet Phase 4: Verify and Close. Invoke with /comet-verify. Verify implementation matches design, handle development branch.
agent-design-best-practices
Best practices for designing Claude Code agent files (.claude/agents/.md). This skill should be used when writing or reviewing agent markdown files to ensure proper design with focused domains, correct tool access, reusable definitions, and separation of capabilities from lifecycle. Combines Anthropic's official…
graphify-dotnet
Use graphify-dotnet to generate codebase knowledge graphs, architecture snapshots, and exportable repository maps from .NET or polyglot source trees, with optional AI-enriched semantic relationships. USE FOR: graphify commands; graph JSON, HTML, SVG, Cypher, Markdown, and Obsidian exports; repository map and…
map-codebase
Deep architecture report that fans out parallel inspections across different aspects of the codebase (structure, tech stack, APIs, patterns, data flow, dependencies, testing) and synthesizes findings into a comprehensive document at .turbo/codebase-map.md and .turbo/codebase-map.html. Use when the user asks to "map…
reply-to-pr-threads
Draft, confirm, and post replies to GitHub PR review threads. Handles per-category reply formatting, re-fetches thread resolution state so auto-resolved threads are skipped, and posts via GraphQL. Use when the user asks to "reply to PR threads", "post PR thread replies", or "draft PR reply messages".