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 it235/multica-best-practices --skill multica-review-frontendgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/it235/multica-best-practicesWrote 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/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-review-frontend)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-review-frontend"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-review-frontend/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/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-review-frontend"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-review-frontend.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 | $0.00054 | $0.00427 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00171 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00085 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00043 |
Grade A, and why
multica-review-frontend 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 1mo 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
Frontend Implementation Professional Review (FrontendReviewer)
Structured professional review framework for frontend implementation artifacts. Called by FrontendReviewer; reviews the changed-file list / repo ref FrontendDev returns via code-class skill, plus the UI link + API contract link Leader passes.
When to use
- FrontendReviewer receives a "review frontend implementation" dispatch from Leader.
- Entering a re-review round after implementation changes (check previous round's fix list item by item).
Review dimensions (conclusion per item)
- UI fit: layout, interaction, states, edge states aligned with Designer output.
- API-contract fit: call params, response handling, error branches aligned with BackendDev contract.
- Component quality: reusability, single responsibility, no obvious smells.
- Unit-test sufficiency: key paths, boundaries, async/error branches covered; no无效的 tests padded for coverage (mark & block).
- Acceptance mapping: implementation truly satisfies every AC-.
Output format
【Frontend Review】<change link>
Conclusion: PASS / FAIL
Blocking items (required on FAIL, each: rationale / involved point / fix direction):
- ...
Suggestions (non-blocking):
- ...
Previous fix-list check (re-review): resolved X / unresolved Y
Round: N / 3
Conclusion + fix list reported to Leader; don't modify code or notify FrontendDev yourself.
Boundaries
- Review only frontend implementation & unit tests, not architecture, requirements, UI design, backend, or test cases.
- Don't replace Leader's generic gate (multica-verification skill).
- Still FAIL at round 3 → mark "escalate to human", hand to Leader, stop looping.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 38 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A d06256935695
multica-review-frontend is a skill published in the GitHub repository it235/multica-best-practices (212 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 427 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…