Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add fprochazka/claude-code-plugins/plugin install glabWrote 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/fprochazka/claude-code-plugins/overview)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fprochazka/claude-code-plugins/overview"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fprochazka/claude-code-plugins/overview/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/fprochazka/claude-code-plugins/overview"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fprochazka/claude-code-plugins/overview.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 | $0.00014 | $0.00398 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00159 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00080 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
overview 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 25d 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.
What it actually says
Context
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/mr-state.py --all
Your task
Report the state of the merge request. Take no action and change no code.
Cover the pipeline, the discussion threads, the external commit statuses, and what blocks the merge right now.
Reading the pipeline dump
The script already ran glab-pipeline inspect for you. Read the pipeline summary file printed above first — it names each failed job, its stage, and its failure reason, and it points at the file that explains it.
Then open only the files the summary names: job-logs/<failed-job>.log for a script failure, test-report.json for test failures, lint.json plus merged.yml for a config error, downstream/<bridge>-<id>.json for a failed child pipeline.
Do not read the logs of jobs that passed. A green pipeline needs no log at all.
summary.json in the same directory holds the same summary as structured data, for jq queries.
Invoke the glab-pipeline skill before you run the CLI directly, for example to re-inspect after a new push.
Reading the discussions
glab-discussion dumped one file per thread into the discussions directory listed above. Read those files. Do not fetch the discussions again.
When the script prints changes since its last run, lead the overview with them. A DEPENDENCY MISSING line means a helper CLI is not installed: say which one, give the install command, and ask before installing.
Additional instructions
$ARGUMENTS
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.
- 25d ago Changed · +4 lines 0e7ad7ea2953
- 1mo ago First seen · 34 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A a017ff87e28b
overview is a skill published in the GitHub repository fprochazka/claude-code-plugins (15 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 398 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 2026-09-12.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.