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 euxx/claude-skills-for-copilot --skill comment-analyzergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/euxx/claude-skills-for-copilotWrote 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/euxx/claude-skills-for-copilot/comment-analyzer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/euxx/claude-skills-for-copilot/comment-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/euxx/claude-skills-for-copilot/comment-analyzer/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/euxx/claude-skills-for-copilot/comment-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/euxx/claude-skills-for-copilot/comment-analyzer.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00521 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00260 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
comment-analyzer 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 10d 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.
Comment Analyzer
Analyze code comments for accuracy, completeness, and long-term maintainability. Protect codebases from comment rot by ensuring every comment adds genuine value.
When to Use
- After adding or modifying documentation comments or docstrings
- When reviewing existing comments for potential technical debt
- When verifying comments accurately reflect the code they describe
Analysis Steps
-
Verify Factual Accuracy: Cross-reference every claim against the actual code.
- Function signatures match documented parameters and return types
- Described behavior aligns with actual code logic
- Referenced types, functions, and variables exist and are used correctly
- Edge cases mentioned are actually handled
- Performance or complexity claims are accurate
-
Assess Completeness:
- Critical assumptions or preconditions are documented
- Non-obvious side effects are mentioned
- Complex algorithms have their approach explained
- Business logic rationale is captured when not self-evident
-
Evaluate Long-term Value:
- Comments that merely restate obvious code should be flagged for removal
- Comments explaining why are more valuable than those explaining what
- Comments that will become outdated with likely future changes should be reconsidered
- Avoid comments referencing temporary states or transitional implementations
-
Identify Misleading Elements:
- Ambiguous language with multiple possible meanings
- Outdated references to refactored code
- Assumptions that may no longer hold
- TODOs or FIXMEs that may already be addressed
Output Format
## Summary
Brief overview of the analysis scope and findings.
## Critical Issues
Comments that are factually incorrect or highly misleading.
- Location: [file:line]
- Issue: [specific problem]
- Suggestion: [recommended fix]
## Improvement Opportunities
- Location: [file:line]
- Current state: [what's lacking]
- Suggestion: [how to improve]
## Recommended Removals
- Location: [file:line]
- Rationale: [why it should be removed]
## Positive Findings
Well-written comments that serve as good examples (if any).
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 71 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 22aa6fb071dc
comment-analyzer is a skill published in the GitHub repository euxx/claude-skills-for-copilot (4 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 521 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-comment-review
Audit and remediate an open GitHub PR's review feedback: verify Copilot and Codex actually reviewed, drive every unresolved thread to a fix-or-justify reply, correct PR title/description drift against the real diff, and run a one-time self-review pass. Trigger on "have all PR comments been addressed", "did copilot and…
audit-legacy-controller
Read the legacy Admin{Domain}sController.php without modifying it. Extract every field rendered, every action method, and every Hook::exec() call.
copilot-mcp-server
Direct access to GitHub Copilot MCP server tools for AI-powered development assistance.
continual-learning
Nightly refinement of an existing per-repo review-style prompt using this reviewer's own finding outcomes. Read confirmed (resolved-by-commit / thumbs-up) and dismissed (thumbs-down) findings, promote the bug patterns the team actually fixes, demote the false-positive patterns, reconcile against the current prompt…
workthreads
SpecStory Workthreads - a weekly work-thread rollup across a team's repos from SpecStory coding histories (any agent - Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and more). It groups the window's sessions into threads of work per project and labels each new / open / recently closed, so a lead sees what shipped, what is still…
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.