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/everyinc/compound-engineering-plugin/ce-resolve-pr-feedbacknpx skills add EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin --skill ce-resolve-pr-feedbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/EveryInc/compound-engineering-pluginWrote 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/everyinc/compound-engineering-plugin/ce-resolve-pr-feedback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/everyinc/compound-engineering-plugin/ce-resolve-pr-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/everyinc/compound-engineering-plugin/ce-resolve-pr-feedback.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 | $0.00036 | $0.01557 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00779 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00311 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00156 |
Grade A, and why
ce-resolve-pr-feedback 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 yesterday.
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.
Resolve PR Review Feedback
Evaluate and fix PR review feedback, then reply and resolve threads. The orchestrator judges every item centrally (the legitimacy gate), then dispatches generic subagents seeded with a skill-local fixer prompt only for items it has approved for a fix.
Escalations never block. needs-human is the escalation channel: leave the thread open with a natural reply and report the structured decision_context. Never pause mid-run to ask. That is what lets an autonomous caller — ce-babysit-pr running unattended, for example — loop this skill. Items that need a human decision come back as needs-human results for the caller to surface, rather than stalling the run; that includes a fix that would change behavior the author chose deliberately (see the rubric).
mode:pipeline (set by an orchestrator like ce-babysit-pr or lfg): the run is unattended, so never call the blocking-question tool for any reason, and read references/pipeline-mode.md before acting. It owns the two things ordinary mode leaves open. First, the open thread is the escalation ledger, so never write a PR-body residual section of your own. Second, the caller may pass a trajectory (unresolved_trend, new_threads_this_tick, invariant_rounds); when it shows that the feedback is not converging, or invariant_rounds[].rounds >= 2 for a key this pass would continue (the next fix would be that key's third round) and that key's escalation is unanswered, answer with one approach-level needs-human rather than fixing nit after nit — an answered escalation authorizes the next action instead. On a fix outcome, return a stable invariant_key per fixed root; do not run pr-snapshot.
Authority in pipeline mode. Being invoked by an orchestrator is not itself authorization. You act under the inherited scope it holds from the user: actions = fix / commit / push / reply / resolve on the PR head, plus ticking a ## Unapplied review findings bullet a committed fix closed (below); exclusions = merge, rebase, force-push, approve CI. You may narrow this (decline a fix, defer a needs-human) but never broaden it — if resolving a thread would require an excluded action, defer it as needs-human rather than perform it.
Default to fixing. Don't churn on what isn't real. Most review feedback -- nitpicks included -- is correct and worth fixing; work the list and fix. Validation is a tripwire, not a gate: you read the code to make the fix anyway, so divert only on a concrete signal. Judge every item on its merits regardless of source (human or bot) or form.
references/evaluation-rubric.mdcarries the four diverts and the evidence each one owes; read it before judging any item.
The PR body's ## Unapplied review findings checklist. A shipping workflow may have left this section: review findings it declined to apply unattended, one - [ ] bullet each, for the reviewer to decide. When a fix you commit closes one of those bullets (same file and concern), tick it to - [x] in the body so the inventory at the top of the PR stays true. Tick only; never add to, reorder, or create that section — it is the author's record, not the escalation ledger.
What ships with it
9 files 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.
- references/agents/pr-comment-resolver.md 5.5 KB
- references/evaluation-rubric.md 14 KB
- references/full-mode.md 28 KB
- references/pipeline-mode.md 3.1 KB
- references/targeted-mode.md 5.3 KB
- scripts/get-pr-comments 6.8 KB
- scripts/get-thread-for-comment 2.8 KB
- scripts/reply-to-pr-thread 1.7 KB
- scripts/resolve-pr-thread 406 B
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.
- yesterday Changed 5411dbae45b8
- 4d ago First seen · 60 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 58228522c4aa
ce-resolve-pr-feedback is a skill published in the GitHub repository EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin (24,821 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 1,557 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
add-community-extension
Add a community extension to the Spec Kit catalog from a GitHub issue submission. USE FOR: processing extension submission issues, validating catalog entries, updating catalog.community.json and docs/community/extensions.md, creating PRs. DO NOT USE FOR: creating new extensions from scratch, or first-party extension…
openspec-explore
Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change.
release-openspec
Use this skill when releasing OpenSpec: audit merged work and changeset coverage, decide whether a catch-up changeset PR is needed, prepare or resume the Changesets Version Packages PR, cut a beta or stable release, verify publishing, and polish GitHub release notes. Also use when asked whether an open release PR is…
openspec-apply-change
Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change. Use when the user wants to start implementing, continue implementation, or work through tasks.
openspec-update-change
Update an OpenSpec change by revising its existing planning artifacts and keeping them coherent with one another. Use when the user wants to revise a change's plan, fold new decisions into it, or reconcile its artifacts after an edit. Never edits code.
openspec-verify-change
Verify implementation matches change artifacts. Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving.