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 frabcd/codex-ai-game-studio --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/frabcd/codex-ai-game-studioWrote 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/frabcd/codex-ai-game-studio/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/frabcd/codex-ai-game-studio/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/frabcd/codex-ai-game-studio/code-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/frabcd/codex-ai-game-studio/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/frabcd/codex-ai-game-studio/code-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 | $0.00041 | $0.01863 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00745 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00373 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00186 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 — 187 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Port provenance: adapted from the pinned upstream source at
984023ddac0d5e27624f2baacde6105e45de375funder MIT; see the repository parity ledger for the exact path and blob.
Phase 1: Load Target Files
Read the target file(s) in full. Read AGENTS.md for project coding standards.
Phase 2: Identify Engine Specialists
Read .ai-game-studio/project.json, section ## Engine Specialists. Note:
- The Primary specialist (used for architecture and broad engine concerns)
- The Language/Code Specialist (used when reviewing the project's primary language files)
- The Shader Specialist (used when reviewing shader files)
- The UI Specialist (used when reviewing UI code)
If the section reads [TO BE CONFIGURED], no engine is pinned — skip engine specialist steps.
Phase 3: ADR Compliance Check
Argument: $ai-game-studio:code-review [file(s)] may optionally include a story file path as the last argument (e.g., $ai-game-studio:code-review src/combat/attack.gd production/epics/combat/story-001.md). If a story path is provided, read it to extract the governing ADR reference.
Search for ADR references in, in priority order:
- The story file (if provided as argument)
- Header comments at the top of the implementation files
- Commit messages referencing these files (
git log --oneline -- [file])
Look for patterns like ADR-NNN or docs/architecture/ADR-.
If no ADR references found, note: "No ADR references found — ADR compliance check skipped. For full ADR compliance review, provide the story path: $ai-game-studio:code-review [files] [story-path]."
For each referenced ADR: read the file, extract the Decision and Consequences sections, then classify any deviation:
- ARCHITECTURAL VIOLATION (BLOCKING): Uses a pattern explicitly rejected in the ADR
- ADR DRIFT (WARNING): Meaningfully diverges from the chosen approach without using a forbidden pattern
- MINOR DEVIATION (INFO): Small difference from ADR guidance that doesn't affect overall architecture
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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 · 187 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A d8c4ae4878c4
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository frabcd/codex-ai-game-studio (17 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 1,863 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
skills-pr-handle
Use when explicitly asked to handle a pull request in the Scenario skills repository, including review comments and skill validation.
pr-handle-comments
Handle review comments received on GitHub for the current branch's PR or a given PR number or URL, by triaging each unresolved thread, fixing what is warranted, pushing, and replying in each thread, when asked to address, fix or answer PR comments. Works in any Scenario repository.
improve
Autonomous quality improvement loop. Scores a target against a rubric, selects the highest-leverage axis, attacks it, verifies, documents, and loops. No pre-planning between iterations — each loop re-scores from scratch.
triage
GitHub issue and PR investigator. Pulls open issues/PRs, classifies them, searches the codebase for root cause or reviews contributed code, proposes fixes with file:line references, and optionally implements fixes. Use for investigating GitHub issues and reviewing PRs; do NOT use for general code review unrelated to…
review
5-pass structured code review — correctness, security, performance, readability, consistency.
pr-summary
Refresh the current pull request description from its net changes, following the repository's PR template, when asked to update or write the PR summary. Works in any Scenario repository, whatever its default branch.