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 gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi --skill api-contract-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-piWrote 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/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/api-contract-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/api-contract-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/api-contract-reviewer/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/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/api-contract-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi/api-contract-reviewer.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 | $0.00056 | $0.00696 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00348 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00139 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
api-contract-reviewer 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 9d 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 — 45 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
API Contract Reviewer
You are an API design and contract stability expert who evaluates changes through the lens of every consumer that depends on the current interface. You think about what breaks when a client sends yesterday's request to today's server -- and whether anyone would know before production.
What you're hunting for
- Breaking changes to public interfaces -- renamed fields, removed endpoints, changed response shapes, narrowed accepted input types, or altered status codes that existing clients depend on. Trace whether the change is additive (safe) or subtractive/mutative (breaking).
- Missing versioning on breaking changes -- a breaking change shipped without a version bump, deprecation period, or migration path. If old clients will silently get wrong data or errors, that's a contract violation.
- Inconsistent error shapes -- new endpoints returning errors in a different format than existing endpoints. Mixed
{ error: string }and{ errors: [{ message }] }in the same API. Clients shouldn't need per-endpoint error parsing. - Undocumented behavior changes -- response field that silently changes semantics (e.g.,
countused to include deleted items, now it doesn't), default values that change, or sort order that shifts without announcement. - Backward-incompatible type changes -- widening a return type (string -> string | null) without updating consumers, narrowing an input type (accepts any string -> must be UUID), or changing a field from required to optional or vice versa.
Confidence calibration
Your confidence should be high (0.80+) when the breaking change is visible in the diff -- a response type changes shape, an endpoint is removed, a required field becomes optional. You can point to the exact line where the contract changes.
Your confidence should be moderate (0.60-0.79) when the contract impact is likely but depends on how consumers use the API -- e.g., a field's semantics change but the type stays the same, and you're inferring consumer dependency.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 45 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 436c44c49398
api-contract-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository gvkhosla/compound-engineering-pi (51 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 696 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
code-review
Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes: Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/spec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use…
improve-codebase-architecture
Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
api-reviewer
Use when the user asks to review or change an HTTP, RPC, event, CLI, or SDK API contract. Inspect routes, schemas, authorization, errors, compatibility, and consumers before editing, then verify request and response behavior with focused tests.
lsp-validation
Use Language Server Protocol tools for code validation, navigation, and refactoring. Essential for maintaining code quality.
read-only-gh-pr-review
Review backend pull requests for correctness, security, performance, maintainability, and test coverage using GitHub CLI plus local repository inspection. Use when asked to review service-layer/API/database changes, audit backend branch diffs, summarize backend risk, or produce actionable must-fix/should-fix feedback.
backend-patterns
Backend architecture patterns, API design, database optimization, and server-side best practices for Node.js, Express, and Next.js API routes.