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 gjkim42/kanon-repo --skill api-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gjkim42/kanon-repoWrote 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/gjkim42/kanon-repo/api-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gjkim42/kanon-repo/api-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gjkim42/kanon-repo/api-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/gjkim42/kanon-repo/api-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gjkim42/kanon-repo/api-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk warn
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 | $0.00087 | $0.01186 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00044 | $0.00593 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00237 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
api-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 10d 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
2 files 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.
- 10d ago First seen · 113 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A 8659af22eecc
api-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository gjkim42/kanon-repo (0 stars, last pushed 2d ago), with no licence file. It adds 87 tokens to every session and 1,186 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
platform-apex-generate
Primary Apex authoring skill for class generation, refactoring, and review. ALWAYS ACTIVATE when the user mentions Apex, .cls, triggers, or asks to create/refactor a class (service, selector, domain, batch, queueable, schedulable, invocable, DTO, utility, interface, abstract, exception, REST resource). Use this skill…
flow-next-impl-review
Carmack-level implementation review of changes via the configured backend. Use when asked to review code or a diff in a flow-next repo.
flow-next-resolve-pr
Resolve PR review feedback. Fetches unresolved threads, triages, fixes, replies and resolves via GraphQL. Use when asked to address review comments.
api-contract-review
Use when auditing CloudBase cloud API wrappers, MCP tools, generated action metadata, or related docs for outdated or incorrect action names, parameters, casing, request shapes, or missing contract tests, especially during periodic quality review or before preparing corrective PRs.
principle-model-the-domain
Apply when writing stateful logic, or when code branches a lot or repeats a shape assumption across files. Encode the domain in a structure instead of scattered conditionals.
api-reviewer
A review of an API contract, the agreed description of how software systems exchange requests, responses, events, or files.