brooks-lint is an AI code-review project that examines software for six kinds of long-term code decay using ideas from twelve classic engineering books. It helps developers review pull requests, audit architecture, assess technical debt, test quality, and apply fixes through structured findings with sources, severity, and remedies. Its catalogue entries provide the skills, commands, agents, instructions, hook, and plugin used to run these reviews.
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 hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-debtgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hyhmrright/brooks-lintWrote 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/hyhmrright/brooks-lint/brooks-debt)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hyhmrright/brooks-lint/brooks-debt"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hyhmrright/brooks-lint/brooks-debt/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/hyhmrright/brooks-lint/brooks-debt"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hyhmrright/brooks-lint/brooks-debt.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 | $0.00131 | $0.00373 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00066 | $0.00187 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00075 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
brooks-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 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.
What it actually says
Brooks-Lint — Tech Debt Assessment
Setup
Read in order:
../_shared/common.md— Iron Law, Project Config, Report Template, Health Score../_shared/source-coverage.md— book coverage, exceptions, tradeoffs../_shared/decay-risks.md— symptom definitions and source attributionsdebt-guide.md(this directory) — the debt classification framework
Process
Scope: if the user did not describe the codebase or point to specific areas, apply
Auto Scope Detection (../_shared/common.md) first.
- Scan for all six decay risks (Step 1 of the guide); list every finding before scoring
- Apply the Pain × Spread priority formula and classify debt intent (Steps 2–3 of the guide)
- Group findings by decay risk (Step 4 of the guide)
- Output using the Report Template from common.md, plus the Debt Summary Table
Mode line in report: Tech Debt Assessment
What ships with it
1 file 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 · 37 lines · 131 tokens per session scan A a44216a2751f
brooks-debt is a skill published in the GitHub repository hyhmrright/brooks-lint (1,471 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 131 tokens to every session and 373 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
recipe-front-review
Reviews completed frontend implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality, and security, then applies user-approved React corrections.
review
Perform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed. Loads atoms conditionally -- clean-code always, architecture/DDD/security/tests only when the delta touches their domain. Produces a severity-ordered report with specific locations and fixes. Use when…
procoder
Work like a senior developer in a repository governed by procoder: run the commit gate before calling anything done, format and lint through the binary, and drive the spec, plan, todo, backlog, and sprint chain in .procoder/. Use this skill when the repository contains a .procoder/ directory or an AGENTS.md naming…
code-review
The depth half of a review - the dimensions a diff is read against (correctness, boundaries, concurrency, failure paths, secrets, data access, structure, test quality) and the rule that a finding is refuted before it is reported. The verdict stays with the reviewer agent. Use when reviewing a diff or a pull request…
deslop
The optimization pass, defined - delete before you add, one smell class per pass, behaviour pinned by a test that ran BEFORE the edit. Lints a SKILL.md and prose by the same instinct. Use for the per-story optimization pass or when code has grown noisy without growing capable.
code-confidence-map
Assesses code comprehensibility and maintainability risk. Use when the user asks about code confidence, risk, maintainability, tech debt, code health, or whether code is safe to change. Also use when the user asks to analyze code quality, scan for risks, check if code is messy or complex, audit code, do a code…