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 agentmods add skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/loop-review-foldnpx skills add gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill loop-review-foldgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflowWrote 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/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/loop-review-fold)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/loop-review-fold"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/loop-review-fold.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00101 | $0.02408 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.01204 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00482 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00241 |
Grade A, and why
loop-review-fold 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 — 201 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review / Fold Loop
Run one small state loop over the current feature or fix unit:
review-change ── findings ──▶ fold-findings ── changed HEAD ──▶ review-change
▲ │
└──────── current PASS ◀───────┘
└─ unresolved ─▶ triage-issue
This skill is a router, not a third review or repair implementation. It reads
the durable evidence left by review-change and fold-findings, chooses the
next action, and stops when a user decision or manual phase execution is
required. Never merge, create an unrelated issue, or silently discard a
finding.
Turn contract
✓ The feature/fix unit, branch, PR, current HEAD, acceptance, and finding ledger were checked
✓ The first action was selected from persisted evidence: PASS, review-change, or fold-findings
✓ review-change ran only when no current review result required fold-findings first
✓ A successful fold was followed by review-change on the new HEAD
✓ Every unresolved finding is named and routed to triage-issue --prioritize-now
✓ An oversized finding routes to plan-feature or plan-fix, new P<n> phases, and manual user execution
✓ No merge, unrelated issue, acceptance weakening, or silent finding drop occurred
✓ The fixed result and the closing → Next: block are the final output
Any unchecked box means the turn is not done.
When to use
Use after execute-phase opens the unit PR, or when the user asks to review and
fold an open feature or fix. The argument identifies the unit:
/loop-review-fold <NN>for a feature unit./loop-review-fold --fix <issue-number>for a fix unit.
Do not use this entrypoint to edit this skill, inspect its implementation as the requested deliverable, or invent a target when the unit argument is missing.
Step 0 — Discover the project (always first)
Read the target project's agent guide and documentation map. Then verify the
target unit, current branch, open PR, remote HEAD, frozen acceptance artifact,
the latest review-change result/receipt, and the unit's review-findings.md.
Use repository and forge commands required by the project's own conventions.
Narration, an old chat result, or a clean worktree alone is not evidence.
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 · +32 lines 38a3d5d03d8d
- 4d ago First seen · 169 lines · 101 tokens per session scan A 905e09224837
loop-review-fold is a skill published in the GitHub repository gtrabanco/agentic-workflow (20 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 101 tokens to every session and 2,408 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
offensive-mitigations
Security mitigation reference and bypass catalog: ASLR, DEP/NX, RELRO, stack canaries, CFI, sandboxing, seccomp. Covers both detection of enabled mitigations and known bypass techniques. Use when assessing target hardening or planning exploit mitigation bypasses.
offensive-exploit-development
Exploit development operational guide: environment setup, debugging workflow, PoC development lifecycle, writing reliable exploits, using pwntools/pwndbg, heap exploitation techniques, and weaponization considerations. Use when actively developing exploits or setting up an exploit dev environment.
offensive-advanced-redteam
Comprehensive red team operations methodology covering full engagement lifecycle from planning through reporting. Addresses engagement scoping and rules of engagement negotiation, multi-tier C2 infrastructure design with redirectors and domain fronting, malleable traffic profiles and beacon tradecraft, OPSEC…
offensive-dependency-confusion
Deep-dive offensive methodology for dependency confusion and namespace attacks across all major package ecosystems. Covers npm scope confusion exploiting the gap between public and private scoped packages and .npmrc misconfigurations where registry mappings fail to pin internal scopes exclusively. Addresses PyPI…
offensive-phishing
Phishing campaign execution methodology for authorized red team engagements. Covers end-to-end campaign lifecycle: infrastructure provisioning (GoPhish, SMTP relay configuration, domain acquisition and aging, SPF/DKIM/DMARC alignment), payload delivery vectors (Office macro weaponization, HTA droppers, ISO/IMG…
offensive-active-directory
Active Directory attack methodology for internal network red team engagements. Covers reconnaissance (BloodHound, PowerView, ADExplorer), credential abuse (Kerberoasting, ASREProasting, NTLM relay, LLMNR/NBT-NS poisoning), privilege escalation (ACL abuse, GPO abuse, unconstrained/constrained delegation), lateral…