Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to gke-labs/kube-agents. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gke-labs/kube-agents/main/.agents/skills/review-docs-drift/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gke-labs/kube-agentsWrote 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/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-docs-drift)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-docs-drift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-docs-drift/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/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-docs-drift"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-docs-drift.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium MCP Rug Pull · line 75 npx commands without a version suffix (e.g. @1.0.0) create a rug-pull risk if the upstream server is compromised and publishes a malicious update.Fix: Pin the version: npx @scope/[email protected]
- medium Excessive Agency · line 85 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00044 | $0.02019 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01009 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00404 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00202 |
Grade A, and why
review-docs-drift 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 today.
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 — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Task
Given a pull request (a branch diff against main), determine whether the repository's documentation is still accurate after the change, and report exactly which documents need updating and why. You are checking two directions:
- Code → docs: the PR changed behavior, names, defaults, paths, or structure that some document states as fact.
- Docs → source: the PR changed documentation, and what it now says must match the source of truth, the repo's documentation rules, and the other docs.
Your two navigation instruments are:
AGENTS.md(repo root) — owns the documentation RULES: the canonical-home table (one home per fact), the generated-region rule, link-don't-summarise, no PR-status prose, verify-identifiers-against-source.docs/README.md— the documentation MAP: what lives where, what each document covers, which files carry generated regions and from which sources, and which source files own the identifiers that docs state as fact.
This skill deliberately holds no repository facts of its own — no file lists, no agent topology, no counts. Facts live in the two instruments above and in the sources they point to; when this skill and a source disagree, the source wins and this skill needs fixing.
Read both before reviewing the diff.
Procedure
1. Collect the change surface
git diff --stat main...HEAD(or the PR's base) — list every changed file.- Classify each changed path:
- Source of a generated region? Check the generated-regions table in the map (
docs/README.md§2). If the changed file — or its frontmatter or comment banner — feeds a generated region, that region must be regenerated (make docs-generate) and committed. - Source of documented identifiers? Check the identifier-sources table in the map (
docs/README.md§2). If the changed file owns names, defaults, versions, section numbering, or baked paths that docs state as fact, find every doc that states a fact about the changed item. - Doc file? → review it under step 3.
- Anything else (code, scripts, workflows, examples) → check the map for pages that describe that component.
- Source of a generated region? Check the generated-regions table in the map (
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.
- today Changed cdb114e779a2
- 11d ago First seen · 86 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A d624339f465a
review-docs-drift is a skill published in the GitHub repository gke-labs/kube-agents (53 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 2,019 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…