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 GetSkill-Agent/getskill-skills --skill rigorous-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GetSkill-Agent/getskill-skillsWrote 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/getskill-agent/getskill-skills/rigorous-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/getskill-agent/getskill-skills/rigorous-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/getskill-agent/getskill-skills/rigorous-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/getskill-agent/getskill-skills/rigorous-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/getskill-agent/getskill-skills/rigorous-code-review.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 | $0.00018 | $0.01230 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00615 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00246 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00123 |
Grade A, and why
Rigorous 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 5d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 168 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A f70a7c0521cf
Rigorous Code Review is a skill published in the GitHub repository GetSkill-Agent/getskill-skills (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,230 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
dos-verify-done-claims
Before accepting an agent's 'done / shipped / fixed' claim, verify it against ground truth (git ancestry + the commit's own diff) using the DOS kernel's dos verify and dos commit-audit — never the agent's own narration.
tsq-audit
A code-audit skill that reviews changed files and runs relevant verification checks. It produces a report grouped by severity across security, type safety, error handling, API compatibility, tests, and performance.
doc-claim-validator
Validate that claims in documentation match codebase reality. Extracts verifiable assertions (file paths, commands, function references, behavioral claims, dependencies) from markdown docs and checks them against the actual project. Use after code changes, before releases, or when docs feel untrustworthy.
requesting-code-review
Pre-commit review: security scan, quality gates, auto-fix.
code-quality
Análise proativa e sob demanda de qualidade de código. Detecta código morto, duplicações, oportunidades de consolidação, complexidade excessiva e code smells. Sugere melhorias e executa correções com aprovação. Triggers on: código morto, dead code, duplicação, duplicated, cleanup, refactor, complexidade, smell…
clean-code-reviewer
Reviews code against Robert C. Martin's Clean Code principles. Use when users share code for review, ask for refactoring suggestions, or want to improve code quality. Produces actionable feedback organized by Clean Code principles with concrete before/after examples.