Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to finos/git-proxy. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/finos/git-proxy/main/.agents/skills/address-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/finos/git-proxyWrote 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/finos/git-proxy/address-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/finos/git-proxy/address-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/finos/git-proxy/address-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/finos/git-proxy/address-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/finos/git-proxy/address-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 | $0.00012 | $0.01378 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00551 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00276 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00138 |
Grade A, and why
address-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 155 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Address review comments on a GitHub pull request.
Read AGENTS.md first. It is the canonical project guide for this repository.
The argument is a PR number (e.g. /address-review 98). If no number is given, ask the user.
Phase 1: Fetch and display comments
-
Save the current branch name:
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD -
Checkout the PR branch:
gh pr checkout <number> --detach -
Fetch review data (pick one):
REST (simple): Lists inline review comments; it does not include per-thread
resolvedstatus, so you cannot rely on it alone to skip resolved threads.
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<number>/comments --paginate
GraphQL (for filtering resolved threads): Returns reviewThreads with isResolved, isOutdated, paths/lines, and nested comments—use this when step 5 must honor “already resolved.” Paginate with cursor (use null or omit for the first page; then pass reviewThreads.pageInfo.endCursor while hasNextPage is true).
gh api graphql -f query='
query($owner:String!, $repo:String!, $number:Int!, $cursor:String) {
repository(owner:$owner, name:$repo) {
pullRequest(number:$number) {
reviewThreads(first:100, after:$cursor) {
pageInfo { hasNextPage endCursor }
nodes {
isResolved
isOutdated
path
line
originalLine
comments(first:100) {
nodes {
databaseId
body
author { login }
createdAt
url
}
}
}
}
}
}
}' -F owner={owner} -F repo={repo} -F number=<number> -F cursor=<cursor>
First page: pass JSON null for cursor (see gh help api / your shell for how gh expects null). Later pages: set cursor to the previous response’s reviewThreads.pageInfo.endCursor until hasNextPage is false.
- Group comments by file. For each comment, extract:
id,path,line(ororiginal_line),body,user.login,in_reply_to_id(to detect threads). If you used GraphQL, mapdatabaseIdtoidand thread fields as needed. - Filter out threads that are already resolved (when using GraphQL method).
- Present a numbered summary to the programmer:
PR #<number> — <n> unaddressed review comments
1. <file>:<line> — @<author>: <first 80 chars of comment>
2. <file>:<line> — @<author>: <first 80 chars of comment>
...
If there are no unaddressed comments, say so and return to the original branch.
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 · 155 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 954f62a5bf11
address-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository finos/git-proxy (262 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 1,378 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
ring:mapping-feature-relationships
Mapping how features relate and phasing the work: categorizing PRD features, grouping them into domains, charting cross-feature journeys, dependencies, and integration points, and defining the binding Phases that plan.md mirrors one-to-one at Gate 7. Gate 2 of ring:planning-large-features; runs after…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.