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 griffinwork40/agent-framework --skill fix-prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/griffinwork40/agent-frameworkWrote 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/griffinwork40/agent-framework/fix-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/griffinwork40/agent-framework/fix-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/griffinwork40/agent-framework/fix-pr/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/griffinwork40/agent-framework/fix-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/griffinwork40/agent-framework/fix-pr.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 | $0.00180 | $0.04438 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00072 | $0.01775 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00888 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00444 |
Grade A, and why
fix-pr 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 19d 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.
This is a copy
97% identical to fix-pr — 6 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 177 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Sub-agent contract
/contract
fix-pr turns "review feedback / red CI on PR N" into a pushed fix commit with test evidence, using worktree isolation so the operator's working tree is never disturbed. The pipeline has three stages: harvest (collect feedback from all GitHub stores), triage (parallel read-only probes validate each issue independently), and fix (a single write agent applies pre-validated proposals). The parallel triage wave eliminates false-positive spec items and pre-computes fix proposals before any write begins, reducing cycling.
Skip when: the fix is a one-line suggestion the operator pointed at directly (apply inline); the PR is already green with all threads resolved (report and stop); or the work is local-only and unpushed (use /ship).
Phase 0 — Input gate & preflight (inline, fail closed)
Parse $ARGUMENTS:
pr— PR number or URL (required). If absent, stop: "fix-pr requires a PR number or URL."repo— repo path from--repo; default: current working directory's git root.no_push— from--no-push: produce the fix in a kept worktree + diff summary, no remote mutation.re_review— from--re-review: after pushing, re-trigger/review(top-level only — see Phase 6 guard).
Preflight (all inline bash; any failure → Blocked, do not improvise):
gh auth status— must be authenticated. Fail closed if not.gh pr view <pr> --json state,headRefName,headRepositoryOwner,isCrossRepository,mergeable,url— PR must be OPEN.- Fork guard: if
isCrossRepositoryis true and the authenticated account cannot push to the head repo, emit Blocked naming the fork and stop. Never attempt workarounds. - Record
head_branch— this is the ONLY branch this skill will ever push to.
Phase 1 — Feedback harvest (inline)
Reviewer feedback lives in three distinct GitHub stores — miss any one and the fix is silently partial. Harvest all three, then the gates:
- Inline review comments:
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<pr>/comments— comments anchored to a diff line (each carriespath/line/diff_hunk). - Review summary bodies:
gh pr view <pr> --json reviews— the top-level body of each APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / COMMENT review submission. - Issue-level conversation comments:
gh pr view <pr> --json comments(equivalentlygh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<pr>/comments). A PR is also an issue, and its plain conversation comments ("also update the docs", "rename this before merge") live on the issues endpoint — thepulls/<pr>/commentsendpoint does NOT return them. Skipping this source is the known gap: reviewers who leave feedback as normal PR comments are otherwise dropped entirely, and a PR can have actionable conversation comments with zero inline review comments.
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.
- 19d ago Changed · +65 lines · +12 tokens per session 26b49482e1c7
- 1mo ago First seen · 112 lines · 168 tokens per session scan A 07ae5b92882c
fix-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository griffinwork40/agent-framework (23 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 180 tokens to every session and 4,438 once invoked, about $0.0007 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to fix-pr, differing in 6 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…