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 HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard --skill common-feedback-reportergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standardWrote 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/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/common-feedback-reporter)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/common-feedback-reporter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/common-feedback-reporter/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/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/common-feedback-reporter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoangnguyen0403/agent-skills-standard/common-feedback-reporter.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00063 | $0.00999 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00500 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00200 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
common-feedback-reporter 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 12d 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 — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Feedback Reporter
Priority: P0 (CRITICAL) — Auto-detect skill violations before file writes.
Mandatory execution contract
For any request that writes code or edits SKILL.md, treat the requested change as a planned write. Before showing code, run this audit and emit the complete violation block when a loaded skill rule is violated. The block must include these exact labels: SKILL VIOLATION DETECTED, Auto-fixed, Root Cause, User Intent, and Skill Gap. Then apply the fix and show the corrected result. Do not silently produce the violating implementation, and do not replace the required block with a summary.
Apply the same contract to these cases:
- If a draft
SKILL.mdexceeds the 100-line limit, report the100-line violation, move large examples toreferences/, and includeRoot Cause,User Intent, andSkill Gapbefore rewriting it. - If a skill recommends an obsolete framework path or API, report
OUTDATED_GUIDANCEand includeUser IntentandSkill Gapbefore giving the current replacement.
For the oversized-draft case, include this exact sentence pattern before the rewrite: SKILL.md is 100+ lines; extract large examples to references/. Root Cause: ... User Intent: ... Skill Gap: ....
🚨 Checkpoint: Before File Writes
Quick check before write_to_file, replace_file_content, multi_replace_file_content:
- Check - Any skills loaded for this file extension?
- NO → ✅ Proceed silently
- YES → Continue to step 2
- Audit - planned code violate loaded skill rules?
- NO → ✅ Proceed silently — ** NOT submit feedback report**
- YES → Output violation block below, then fix immediately
Violation Report Format
When violation detected, output this block before fixing:
🚨 SKILL VIOLATION DETECTED
Skill: [skill-id]
File: [relative/path/to/file.ext]:[line-range]
Rule: [exact rule text from SKILL.md]
Violation: [what planned code does — up to 5-line offending snippet]
Fix: [corrected approach — up to 5-line corrected snippet]
Auto-fixed: YES / NO
Root Cause: [AMBIGUOUS_RULE | MISSING_COVERAGE | OUTDATED_GUIDANCE | COMPETING_RULES | PATTERN_MISMATCH]
User Intent: [1 sentence: what the user was trying to achieve]
Skill Gap: [1–2 sentences: what change to the SKILL.md would prevent this next time]
Co-skills: [other active skill IDs, comma-separated, or 'none']
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 92 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 62bc5913c92f
common-feedback-reporter is a skill published in the GitHub repository HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard (565 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 999 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-quality
Comprehensive frontend code review for TypeScript 6 and React 19.2 — clean code principles, component patterns, type safety, accessibility, and performance. Use when user says "review code", "refactor", "check this PR", or before merging changes.
spotpatch
A development workflow for React that connects a selected page element to its JSX or TSX source code and gathers context for review.
ralph
Ralph - persistent self-referential execution loop wrapping ultrawork with independent verifier verification.
review
Full QA review pipeline covering security audit (OWASP Top 10), performance analysis, accessibility check (WCAG 2.1 AA), and code quality review.
design-lenses
Critique a game's design through Schell's lenses, MDA and systems thinking, ranking findings by severity with fixes. Design-level review, not bugs or feel tuning.
Component Test Scaffold (Next.js)
Generate React/Next.js component test skeletons (RTL) from specifications.