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 existential-birds/beagle --skill respond-pr-feedbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/existential-birds/beagleWrote 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/existential-birds/beagle/respond-pr-feedback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/existential-birds/beagle/respond-pr-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/existential-birds/beagle/respond-pr-feedback/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/existential-birds/beagle/respond-pr-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/existential-birds/beagle/respond-pr-feedback.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 | $0.00015 | $0.01780 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00712 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00356 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00178 |
Grade A, and why
respond-pr-feedback scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 223 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Respond to PR Feedback
Post replies to review comments after you've evaluated the feedback and made fixes. Resolves conversation threads by default.
Usage
Invoke the respond-pr-feedback skill, optionally passing these flags:
respond-pr-feedback [--pr <number>] [--no-resolve]
Flags:
--pr <number>- PR number to target (default: current branch's PR)--no-resolve- Skip thread resolution after posting replies (default: resolve all)
Prerequisites
Run the fetch-pr-feedback skill first to evaluate the feedback and make any necessary fixes.
Hard gates (sequenced)
Advance only after each pass condition is met (objective checks—not assumed completion).
- Prerequisite satisfied: You have already run the fetch-pr-feedback skill, evaluated each thread, and applied fixes or chosen an explicit response strategy per thread (no posting blind).
- Context loaded: Step 2 commands exit
0; values parsed fromgh pr view,gh repo view, andgh api userare non-empty and assigned to$PR_NUMBER,$PR_AUTHOR,$OWNER,$REPO,$CURRENT_USER—never invent owner, repo, or PR number. - Queue decided: Step 3a
jqexits0. If the filtered list is empty, output exactlyAll review comments have been addressed.and stop (do not call reply or GraphQL resolve APIs). - Reply before resolve: For each target comment, Step 4
gh api .../repliesexits0before Step 5 attempts resolution for that item (unless--no-resolve). - Resolve with mapping: Step 5 calls
resolveReviewThreadonly when Step 3b provides athreadIdfor that comment’s id; if there is no mapping, skip resolution for that item without treating it as failure.
Instructions
1. Parse Arguments
Extract flags from $ARGUMENTS:
--pr <number>or detect from current branch--no-resolveflag (boolean, default false)
2. Get PR Context
# Get PR info (if --pr not specified, uses current branch)
gh pr view --json number,author --jq '{number, author: .author.login}'
# Get repo owner/name
gh repo view --json owner,name --jq '{owner: .owner.login, name: .name}'
# Get current authenticated user
gh api user --jq '.login'
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 223 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 43e9bf5b047b
respond-pr-feedback is a skill published in the GitHub repository existential-birds/beagle (84 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 1,780 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
review-prs
Triage open PRs — screen from the diff, delegate the admission judgment to audit-the-list, then merge or close on GitHub. Fire when the maintainer asks to review PRs, process the PR queue, or judge whether a specific PR should be merged.
reviewing-personhog-protocol
The full review process for personhog coordination-protocol changes — leases, fencing, handoffs, supervisors, failure budgets, warming, and changelog semantics. Use before pushing or requesting review on any personhog protocol changeset, when asked for an exhaustive or careful review of personhog code, and after any…
vhs-e2e-gif
Record a test run, a TUI session, or any terminal command as a GIF with VHS and attach it to a GitHub PR as a release-hosted asset, never a repo commit. Use when asked to record an e2e run, demo a fix on a PR, attach a GIF or screen recording to a pull request, show a test passing visually, or produce a terminal…
python-format
Formats Python files with ruff format and reports which files changed.
pixiv-cli-pr
Prepare, update, or verify a pixiv-cli pull request using its current template, trusted verification policy, reviewed diff, and head-specific check results. Use for contributor handoff or PR readiness; merging, live /test execution, and releases are separate actions.
gitlab-merge-request-review
Review and merge GitLab merge requests via the gitlab-api MCP server — by default the MRs assigned to you or where you are a reviewer, optionally scoped to a project, group, or the whole instance. Read an MR, gate it on a green pipeline (pipeline → jobs → job log), then approve, accept/merge, or set…