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 GobbyAI/gobby --skill holistic-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GobbyAI/gobbyWrote 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/gobbyai/gobby/holistic-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gobbyai/gobby/holistic-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gobbyai/gobby/holistic-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/gobbyai/gobby/holistic-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gobbyai/gobby/holistic-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 | $0.00029 | $0.01133 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00566 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00227 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00113 |
Grade A, and why
holistic-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
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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 · 131 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 7a96b8545ddc
holistic-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository GobbyAI/gobby (19 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,133 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
gh-pr-review
Review GitHub Pull Requests using the gh CLI. Use when a user asks to review a PR, perform code review, check a pull request, or provide feedback on proposed changes. Triggers on phrases like "review PR", "review pull request", "check PR", "code review".
code-review
Provides expert code review guidelines and best practices.
code-review
Use this skill when the user asks for a code review, audit, or “what could be wrong here”. The output should be a review, not a rewrite: prioritize bugs, security risks, behavioral regressions, and missing tests.
pair-review
Standalone cross-review of current git changes with a fresh read-only reviewer, optionally adding Codex's native review. ONLY runs when the user explicitly types /pair-review. NEVER activate automatically.
commit
Structured git commits with conventional format.
receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation.