kube-agents: Skill for Claude Code

.agents/skills/review-preflight/SKILL.md

review-preflight is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from gke-labs/kube-agents. It costs 44 tokens per session (3,103 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A pre-pull-request review process that combines adversarial checking with documentation checking. Adversarial review looks for defects or risks from the viewpoint of someone trying to break the change.

In plain words
What is it for?
Preparing the self-review section of a pull request, including fixing the comparison range and combining security-minded and documentation-drift findings.
Why use it?
It helps catch problems before a proposed change is submitted by using reviewers that did not write the change and by keeping all checks focused on the same code difference.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: reads .claude/ paths; mentions subagents; mentions Claude Code.

This is gke-labs/kube-agents's own configuration. It tells Claude Code and Codex how to work on kube-agents itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything kube-agents configures →

Reuse

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.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gke-labs/kube-agents/main/.agents/skills/review-preflight/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gke-labs/kube-agents

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-preflight

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-preflight/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-preflight)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-preflight"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-preflight/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-preflight

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-preflight"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gke-labs/kube-agents/review-preflight.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 44 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 3,103 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to high

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 →

  • high Excessive Agency · line 111
    Skill selects an external model or provider that may use a different account or billing plan than the operator expects. Undisclosed model switches can cause unexpected cost or quota consumption.
    Fix: Remove the model/provider override or disclose it prominently and require explicit operator approval before invoking an external coding CLI or billed model.
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 111
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00044 $0.03103
Opus 5.5 $0.00018 $0.01241
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00009 $0.00621
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00310

Measured 17d ago against content hash 63c71911c961, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-preflight 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 17d 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.

.agents/skills/review-preflight/SKILL.md · 226 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 226 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Task

Get every pre-PR review pass into a context that did not write the change, then merge what comes back into the list that becomes the pull request's Self-Review section.

This skill is plumbing. It holds no review method — review-adversarial and review-docs-drift own that — and it does not state the requirement: "Pull Request Hygiene" in AGENTS.md does, and that list wins if this file disagrees with it.

.claude/commands/pr-preflight.md is the Claude Code wrapper. Any harness can follow this file directly.

Procedure

1. Fix the diff range

One range, shared by every pass. Fetch the base first — a base you have not refreshed silently widens the range with commits that already merged, and the passes then review other people's work as though it were yours:

# The remote pointing at gke-labs/kube-agents is not reliably called `upstream`, and
# on a clone of the upstream repository rather than a fork it is `origin`. Find it.
BASE_BRANCH=main                                  # or the branch you will target
BASE_REMOTE=$(git remote | while read -r r; do
  case "$(git remote get-url "$r")" in *gke-labs/kube-agents*) echo "$r"; break;; esac
done)
# HTTPS, not SSH. The fallback fires when no remote matches — a plain clone of a fork,
# which every open pull request here comes from — and that is where a sandbox or a CI
# runner has no key. The repository is public, so HTTPS needs no credential at all.
: "${BASE_REMOTE:=https://github.com/gke-labs/kube-agents.git}"

git fetch "$BASE_REMOTE" "+refs/heads/$BASE_BRANCH:refs/kube-agents-base/$BASE_BRANCH" || {
  echo "base fetch failed — stop here rather than reviewing against a stale base" >&2
  exit 1
}
BASE=refs/kube-agents-base/$BASE_BRANCH

git diff --stat "$BASE"...HEAD     # three-dot: against the merge base, not the base tip

Three-dot keeps base-branch drift out of everyone's scope. If the fetch fails, stop and say so: there is no safe fallback, because the wrong base fails in the direction that hides findings.

Read the full file on GitHub · 226 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 17d ago Changed · +3 lines 63c71911c961
  2. 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines 15b8065abcde
  3. 1mo ago Changed · +2 lines b1f9db91ee4d
  4. 1mo ago First seen · 220 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 09a29a8359be

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-preflight is a skill published in the GitHub repository gke-labs/kube-agents (116 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 3,103 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

autoreview

Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.

openclaw/clawhub · 17 tokens

omh-code-review

This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).

rlaope/oh-my-hermes · 48 tokens

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"…

umputun/revdiff · 84 tokens

re0-merge

Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…

LilMGenius/paperthin · 70 tokens

explore-unknowns

Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…

dzhng/skills · 162 tokens

asplos-writing-style

Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills · 65 tokens