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/fmind/dotfiles/diff-reviewnpx skills add fmind/dotfiles --skill diff-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fmind/dotfilesWhat 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 | $0.00057 | $0.01205 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00602 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00241 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00120 |
Grade A, and why
diff-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 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 — 65 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Diff Review
Find defects that would justify changing the candidate, with enough evidence for the author to reproduce and fix them.
Boundary
- Review only by default. Do not edit code, resolve threads, commit, push, or approve a pull request unless the user separately requests that action.
- Resolve the exact target and record base, head, working-tree state, and whether the evidence covers a dirty candidate, local commit, or remote pull-request head.
- Preserve staged, unstaged, and untracked work. Use an isolated temporary worktree when broad validation would mutate or misrepresent the candidate.
- Review against repository instructions, the issue or spec contract, and current source behavior. A green suite does not prove the intended behavior was implemented.
- Report only actionable defects, material test gaps, or explicit requested nits. Do not manufacture findings to make the review look useful.
Workflow
- Resolve intent and target: Read the request, issue, spec, plan, and change description. Identify the exact comparison and proof already supplied.
- Inventory the delta: Inspect changed files, generated artifacts, dependency or schema changes, and nearby code needed to understand behavior. Do not review the diff in isolation when invariants live elsewhere.
- Read tests first: Determine what behavior the candidate claims, whether tests can fail for the defect class, and which requirements remain unproved.
- Trace intended versus implemented: Map permissions, user journeys, data rules, failure semantics, and operational promises to concrete code paths and tests.
- Review by risk: Examine correctness, data integrity, authorization, input boundaries, concurrency, resource lifecycle, error propagation, compatibility, migration, performance, observability, and rollback in proportion to the change. Challenge pass-through abstractions, hidden dependency construction, tests that bypass the public seam, and hypothetical flexibility with no second concrete use.
- Verify candidates: Reproduce each suspected defect with code tracing, a focused test, or a safe isolated temporary experiment. Quote the specific file and line that makes the finding real.
- Run proportional checks: Start with focused tests and static analysis; run the repository-owned full gate when cost and target coherence permit. Record exactly which candidate each result covers.
- Calibrate: Discard preferences and speculation. Rank remaining findings by user impact, exploitability, data loss, regression likelihood, and confidence.
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 First seen · 65 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A f7129ca24521
diff-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository fmind/dotfiles (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,205 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
dotfiles-bootstrap
Bootstrap a workstation with the dotfiles framework. Takes a GitHub user / owner+repo / explicit clone URL and runs dot init (which shells out to chezmoi) with the right safety prompts. Honors the active agent profile (ask / plan / apply / audit) so it defaults to dry-run in safer modes and full apply in apply.
vibe
Delegate a coding task to a cheap AI model (Mistral Vibe by default, but any provider Vibe knows about — DeepSeek, Gemini Flash, etc.) and supervise the result via git diff. Claude orchestrates, the cheap model codes. Claude consumes 500-1500 tokens per delegation regardless of how many file reads the delegate does…
aiq-research
Use when asked to run deep research or AI-Q research through a reachable NVIDIA AI-Q Blueprint backend.
obsidian-bases
Obsidian Bases database feature for YAML-based interactive note views. Use when creating .base files, writing filter queries, building formulas, configuring table/card views, or working with Obsidian properties and frontmatter databases.
telegram
Send notifications, interactive questions, or multiple-choice polls to the user via Telegram. Use when the user asks to be notified ("ping me", "notify me on Telegram", "ask me when..."), when a long-running task finishes and the user is likely away, when an irreversible action needs out-of-band confirmation, or when…
chezmoi-expert
Comprehensive chezmoi dotfiles management expertise including templates, cross-platform configuration, file naming conventions, and troubleshooting. Covers source directory management, reproducible environment setup, and chezmoi templating with Go templates. Use when user mentions chezmoi, dotfiles, cross-platform…