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 eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseur --skill db-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseurWrote 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/eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseur/db-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseur/db-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseur/db-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/eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseur/db-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseur/db-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00017 | $0.00779 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00390 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
db-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 12d 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 — 60 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Database Schema Review
Analyse the specified database schema files and provide actionable improvement suggestions.
Files and instructions: $ARGUMENTS
What to review
- Indexing: missing indexes on foreign keys, frequently queried columns, and composite indexes for multi-column lookups. Flag redundant or duplicate indexes.
- Data types: overly wide types (e.g.
VARCHAR(255)whereVARCHAR(50)suffices,BIGINTwhereINTis enough), incorrect types (e.g. strings for dates, floats for currency), and missing precision on decimals. - Normalisation: repeated data that should be extracted into separate tables, denormalisation without justification, and violation of normal forms.
- Naming conventions: inconsistent table/column naming (mixed camelCase and snake_case, plural vs singular), unclear or ambiguous column names.
- Constraints: missing
NOT NULLwhere nullability is unlikely intentional, missingUNIQUEconstraints, missingCHECKconstraints for bounded values, and missingDEFAULTvalues. - Referential integrity: missing or incorrect foreign key relationships, cascading deletes that may be dangerous, orphan-prone relationships.
- Performance: tables likely to grow large without partitioning strategy, missing covering indexes for known query patterns, N+1-prone relationship structures.
- Schema-level concerns: missing
created_at/updated_ataudit columns, soft-delete patterns without indexes on the deleted flag, missing composite primary keys on junction tables.
How to interpret arguments
The arguments are free-form and flexible. They may contain:
- File references of any type and in any format:
@schema.sql,migrations/001.sql,models.py, schema.prisma,schema.rb db/structure.sql - Additional natural language instructions alongside file references, such as:
- "focus on indexing only"
- "this is a read-heavy workload"
- "we use PostgreSQL 16"
- "also check the migration files in db/migrations"
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 60 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 37c3f3350b99
db-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository eugeniosegala/claude-connoisseur (9 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 779 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
triage-contributor-pr
Triage open pull requests from external contributors to prisma/prisma and produce a per-PR verdict with evidence. Use when a maintainer asks to triage, evaluate, assess, or review the queue of incoming contributor PRs, to decide whether a fork PR is safe to run CI on, to check whether a PR is in scope for its version…
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
review-triage-phase
Produces canonical review actions from fetched review state and renders action markdown. Use when the user wants only triage/action-planning for the review-framework workflow.
no-bare-casts
Writing as in TypeScript or TSX production code, modifying a file that contains a bare as cast, silencing a type error with a cast, encountering as unknown as, or reviewing a cast site.
review-prs
Review a GitHub pull request in the googleapis/mcp-toolbox repo against the team's reviewer checklist: PR title/description conventions, linked issue, logic errors and unhandled edge cases, breaking changes, test coverage, docs updates, security (input handling), and new dependencies. Use whenever a maintainer asks…
migration-review
Review database migration files when a change adds or modifies paths under migrations/. Use it before merge to collect forward, rollback, locking, and data-safety evidence.