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 gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill review-debtgit 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/review-debt)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/review-debt"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/review-debt.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00068 | $0.00752 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00376 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00150 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
review-debt 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 8d 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 — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Tech Debt (internal)
Composed by review-change / product-audit within their conversation — on any
agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. Findings only; never edits,
never refactors.
Scope
The caller's synthesized findings table (the fused, classified decision
table). This pass does not rescan the diff: debt-shaped findings are already
in the table, and every ownership decision already happened in the finder axes
(review-code, review-verify, …). State the scope — the change the table was
synthesized over — at the top of the returned table.
Transform (evaluate EVERY row — none is optional; n/a must be stated)
Turn the table's tech-debt-shaped rows (TODO/FIXME/HACK, duplication, stale or orphaned abstractions, dead code, complexity hotspots, missing tests, workarounds pinned to upstream fixes) into explicit, payable debt items:
✓ Restate each debt-shaped finding at file:line with what it defers
✓ Attribute it to the axis already recorded in the table — never re-litigate ownership
✓ Confirm every debt item carries a TRIGGER: the condition under which it must be
paid (e.g. "3rd consumer appears", ">100k rows") — a debt item without a
trigger is itself a finding
✓ Verify no current-unit debt was mislabeled non-blocking: current-unit work
cannot be postpone/tradeoff/wontfix — a table showing one is flagged back
to the classifier, never reclassified here
✓ Honor the dead-code exception: staged/planned code cross-checked against the
roadmap/SPEC/TASKS is not dead code — mark verify when unsure, never assert
Return exactly
REVIEW TECH DEBT — scope: <scope>
| # | Finding | Sev | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what> | critical|major|minor | <file:line> | <trigger + smallest action> |
Rows: <n> transformed, <n> with trigger, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)
Summary: <1-2 sentences>
Decision: PASS | FAIL
For this pass, the Suggested fix column carries the TRIGGER — the condition under which the debt must be paid — alongside the smallest action.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 73 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A d17213578fef
review-debt is a skill published in the GitHub repository gtrabanco/agentic-workflow (21 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 752 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
argumentation
Construct well-structured arguments using the hypothesis-argument-example triad. Covers formulating falsifiable hypotheses, building logical arguments (deductive, inductive, analogical, evidential), providing concrete examples, and steelmanning counterarguments. Use when writing or reviewing PR descriptions that…
cross-review-project
Conduct a structured cross-project code review between two Claude Code instances via the cross-review-mcp broker. Each agent reads its own codebase, reviews the peer's code, and engages in evidence-backed dialogue — with QSG scaling laws enforcing review quality through minimum bandwidth constraints and phase-gated…
create-pull-request
Create and manage pull requests using GitHub CLI. Covers branch preparation, writing PR titles and descriptions, creating PRs, handling review feedback, and merge/cleanup workflows. Use when proposing changes from a feature or fix branch for review, merging completed work into the main branch, requesting code review…
coding-guidance-python
Python implementation and review skill. Use when writing, modifying, refactoring, or reviewing Python code, especially production Python that needs clear contracts, type safety, testability, and maintainable module boundaries. Portable across Python repos and tooling stacks.
007
Security audit, hardening, threat modeling (STRIDE/PASTA), Red/Blue Team, OWASP checks, code review, incident response, and infrastructure security for any project.
address-github-comments
Use when you need to address review or issue comments on an open GitHub Pull Request using the gh CLI.