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 ivanviragine/wade --skill batch-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ivanviragine/wadeWrote 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/ivanviragine/wade/batch-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ivanviragine/wade/batch-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ivanviragine/wade/batch-review/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/ivanviragine/wade/batch-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ivanviragine/wade/batch-review.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 | $0.00016 | $0.00139 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00069 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00028 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00014 |
Grade A, and why
batch-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 4d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 17 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 6880637d019e
batch-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ivanviragine/wade (5 stars, last pushed yesterday), with no licence file. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 139 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
requesting-code-review
Use when implementation is done and you need a structured pre-PR review workflow. Triggers: 'ready for review', 'review my changes before PR', 'pre-merge check', 'is this ready', 'submit for review'. NOT for: post-merge review (use code-review) or deciding how to integrate (use finishing-a-development-branch).
git
This skill should be used when the user asks to "commit changes", "create a pull request", "rebase safely", "manage branches", "fix merge conflicts", "undo a commit", "comment on a PR", "create a release", or performs any git/GitHub operations. Provides safety patterns, atomic commit formatting, PR descriptions…
comprehensive-review-pr-enhance
You are a PR optimization expert specializing in creating high-quality pull requests that facilitate efficient code reviews. Generate comprehensive PR descriptions, automate review processes, and ensure PRs follow best practices for clarity, size, and reviewability.
ponytail
Forces the laziest solution that actually works; use on coding tasks or when the user says ponytail, be lazy, simplest solution, YAGNI, do less, or complains about over-engineering, bloat, boilerplate, or unnecessary dependencies. Do not use for non-coding requests.
github-pr-workflow
Prepare a GitHub pull request from a feature branch — branch hygiene, commit shape, title/body, verification notes, screenshots for UI work, and replies to review comments.
work-unit-commits
Plan commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.