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/huggingface/openenv/alignment-reviewnpx skills add huggingface/OpenEnv --skill alignment-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/huggingface/OpenEnvWhat 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 | $0.00042 | $0.00788 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00394 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00158 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
alignment-review 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 2d 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 — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Alignment Review
Review code changes for alignment with OpenEnv principles using a two-tier model.
Instructions
-
Run automated checks first:
- Execute
bash .claude/hooks/lint.sh- capture lint issues - Execute
bash .claude/hooks/check-debug.sh- capture debug code
- Execute
-
Read alignment documents:
.claude/docs/PRINCIPLES.md- design principles.claude/docs/INVARIANTS.md- system invariants
-
Read open RFCs:
- Scan
rfcs/directory for all RFC files - Note the status of each RFC (Draft, In Review, Accepted, Implemented)
- Pay special attention to Draft and In Review RFCs - these represent active design discussions
- Scan
-
Analyze changes (use
git diffor provided diff):- Identify mechanical issues (Tier 1)
- Flag alignment concerns (Tier 2)
- Flag conflicts with open RFCs (Tier 2)
Tier 1: Uncontentious Issues (Fix Immediately)
These are issues to fix without human input:
- Lint failures from hook output
- Debug code from hook output (print statements, breakpoints)
- Uninitialized variables, type errors
- Missing imports, syntax errors
- Security issues (credential exposure, injection vulnerabilities)
Tier 2: Alignment Discussion Points
For each potential alignment concern, format as:
**ALIGNMENT FLAG**: [Brief description]
- **Principle/RFC at stake**: [Which principle from PRINCIPLES.md or RFC number]
- **The concern**: [What seems misaligned or in conflict]
- **Suggested reviewer**: @darktex [pull actual reviewers based on authors of the specific line of PRINCIPLES.md and INVARIANTS.md using git blame, and/or authors of conflicting RFCs]
Examples of Tier 2 Issues
Principle conflicts:
- Adding external reward computation (violates "rewards in environment")
- Client importing server code (violates client-server separation)
- New API that differs from Gymnasium pattern
RFC conflicts (flag even for Draft/In Review RFCs):
- Change conflicts with design proposed in an open RFC
- Change pre-empts a decision being discussed in an RFC
- Change implements something differently than an RFC proposes
- Change affects an area covered by an RFC under review
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 95 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 511d55d37baa
alignment-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository huggingface/OpenEnv (2,531 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed BSD-3-Clause. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 788 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…