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 GoogilyBoogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools --skill the-criticgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GoogilyBoogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-toolsWrote 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/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/the-critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/the-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/the-critic/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/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/the-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/googilyboogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools/the-critic.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 | $0.00077 | $0.01791 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00716 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00358 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00179 |
Grade A, and why
the-critic 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 1mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 191 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
The Critic — Orchestrator
Launch all specialist critics in parallel, consolidate their findings into a unified report with cross-cutting pattern analysis.
You coordinate — you do NOT review code yourself. Your job is to dispatch, collect, deduplicate, and synthesize.
Input
$ARGUMENTS — target to review plus optional flags:
- Target: file path, directory, git ref, "recent changes", "unstaged changes", or empty (auto-detect)
--critics <list>— comma-separated critic names without the-criticsuffix (e.g.,--critics approach,security,solid). Default: auto-select based on file types--severity <level>— filter consolidated output to this severity and above (critical, high, medium, low). Default: all--output <path>— write consolidated report to file. Default: conversation only
Parse Arguments
Extract from $ARGUMENTS:
- Target: everything before the first
--flag - Critics filter: comma-separated value after
--critics - Severity filter: value after
--severity - Output path: value after
--output
Step 1: Determine Target
If no explicit target provided, auto-detect:
- Run
git status --short— if unstaged/staged changes exist, collect those file paths - If no changes, run
git log --oneline -1andgit show HEAD --name-only --format=""— use the most recent commit - If no commits, run
git diff --name-only HEAD~5..HEAD 2>/dev/null— use recently modified files
Determine the target description string to pass to each critic. This should be the exact same value for all critics — either the original $ARGUMENTS target, or a description like "unstaged changes" or "HEAD commit".
Step 2: Determine File Types
Examine the target files to classify them:
- Source code: *.ts, *.js, *.py, *.go, *.rs, *.java, *.rb, *.php, *.cs, *.swift, *.kt, *.tsx, *.jsx
- Test files: .test., .spec., _test., test_.
- Config files: *.json, *.yaml, *.yml, *.toml, *.ini, .env
- Markup/docs: *.md, *.txt, *.rst, *.adoc
- SQL: *.sql
- Shell scripts: *.sh, *.bash, *.zsh
- Styles: *.css, *.scss, *.less
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 191 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 1269b95090ff
the-critic is a skill published in the GitHub repository GoogilyBoogily/googilyboogily-claude-power-tools (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 1,791 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
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…
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…
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…