review-opinion-delivery

review-opinion-delivery is a skill for Codex from jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills. It costs 150 tokens per session (1,293 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A workflow for turning an architect's existing construction-drawing review notes into a Chinese Word document with linked evidence and checked pages.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to package approved or draft DOCX opinions, marked DWG or PDF locations, and screenshots into a verified review report.
Why use it?
It keeps the reviewer's conclusions unchanged while organizing the supporting drawings, screenshots, and document details for delivery.

Skill for Codex

Written for Codex: agents/openai.yaml present.

Good fit Use it to package approved or draft DOCX opinions, marked DWG or PDF locations, and screenshots into a verified review report.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills/review-opinion-delivery
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills --skill review-opinion-delivery
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills

Made for: Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-opinion-delivery

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills/review-opinion-delivery/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills/review-opinion-delivery)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills/review-opinion-delivery"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills/review-opinion-delivery/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-opinion-delivery

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills/review-opinion-delivery"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills/review-opinion-delivery.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 150 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,293 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00150 $0.01293
Opus 5.5 $0.00060 $0.00517
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00030 $0.00259
Haiku 4.5 $0.00015 $0.00129

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 6d523b14fd17, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-opinion-delivery 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.

The scan reads SKILL.md. This mod also ships 20 executable files (evals/run_regression_checks.py, evals/run_v12_regression_checks.py, evals/test_v13_delivery_contract.py, …), listed below but not scanned — reading those needs a real analyzer, not pattern matching.

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.

review-opinion-delivery/SKILL.md · 58 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

施工图审查意见整理交付

Package opinions already made by the reviewer into a faithful, evidence-linked Word deliverable. Keep this workflow separate from technical drawing review.

Non-Negotiable Boundary

  • Treat the reviewer's latest confirmed DOCX as the highest content and style authority. Preserve its approved wording, item scope, certainty, regulation text, item consolidation, and mandatory/suggested status.
  • Do not add, remove, strengthen, weaken, merge, split, or infer a technical conclusion without explicit reviewer approval.
  • Use drawings only to locate marks and verify transcription. Do not derive new issues from them.
  • Preserve 无 only when it is reviewer-approved or explicitly confirmed as an internal contradiction, missing name/index, or design-expression issue that does not assert an external threshold. An unreviewed placeholder 无 blocks delivery; regulation research, completion, and conclusion reclassification require a separately authorized building-review phase.
  • Correct obvious typos, punctuation errors, and deterministic opinion-type aliases; record the before/after/reason in edit_log.csv.
  • If a correction has two plausible results or could change 必须修改/建议修改, technical meaning, applicability, or responsibility, mark it 需确认 and stop delivery.
  • Every opinion type must resolve to one of the 12 canonical values in references/opinion-types.json; invalid or unresolved values are a hard failure.
  • Record material source conflicts as 需确认; do not silently correct professional substance.

Read references/scope-boundary.md before editing any opinion.

Required Workflow

  1. Create a workspace with scripts/create_delivery_workspace.py. For an existing project, pass --root <project>\03_审图过程.
  2. Preserve every original under source/. Never overwrite a source file.
  3. After the source set is stable, run scripts/snapshot_source_integrity.py <workspace>.
  4. Build the v1.3 delivery_manifest.json following references/delivery-contract-v13.md: stable IDs, source dispositions, approved content, claim/image correspondence, evidence history and location policy. Legacy v1.0–v1.2 remain readable without automatic migration. Distinguish reviewer-approved regulation 无 from an unreviewed placeholder. Fill actual checks in verification_log.csv and corrections in edit_log.csv.
  5. For marked DWG evidence, plot a working copy to PDF and crop only from rendered PDF pages. Never place CAD/T20 interface screenshots in the formal Word.
  6. Run scripts/normalize_opinion_types.py <workspace> and then scripts/validate_delivery_package.py <workspace> before editing or generating the final Word. Deterministic corrections are mandatory; unresolved types must block delivery.
  7. If a reviewer-approved DOCX exists, use the newest one as the base and make only approved local edits. Use scripts/generate_delivery_report.py only when no base DOCX exists.
  8. Run scripts/validate_docx_content.py; prohibit all process traces except the strictly authorized PDF page/title locator. Update continuation and cross-references using stable IDs after deletion/merging/reordering. Export with Word, render all pages with the current manifest/DOCX/PDF hash snapshot, inspect each page and run scripts/validate_report_qa.py. Any subsequent change invalidates QA.
  9. Deliver only after both content and visual gates pass. Copy the final DOCX to <project>\04_审图成果; do not make scripts guess the project root.

Read the full file on GitHub · 58 lines

Files

What ships with it

32 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.

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines 6d523b14fd17
  2. 2mo ago First seen · 57 lines · 150 tokens per session scan A 93602d9a9615

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-opinion-delivery is a skill published in the GitHub repository jack20040828/kangmaojian-skills (14 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 150 tokens to every session and 1,293 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-31.

Related

review-opinion-delivery compared with skills from other repositories

review-opinion-delivery next to 6 skills from other repositories
ModTypeStarsLast pushLicenceScanTokensWorks with
review-opinion-deliveryjack20040828/kangmaojian-skillsSkill141mo agoMITA150Codex
code-to-diagramzebbern/claude-code-guideSkill4.7ktodayMITA74Claude Code, Codex
product-data-cleanupAlpacaLabsLLC/skills-for-architectsSkill4112d agoMITA42Claude Code
product-cut-sheetAlpacaLabsLLC/skills-for-architectsSkill4112d agoMITA55Claude Code
slide-deck-generatorAlpacaLabsLLC/skills-for-architectsSkill4112d agoMITA37Claude Code
ffe-spec-bookAlpacaLabsLLC/skills-for-architectsSkill4112d agoMITA48Claude Code
product-spec-pdf-parserAlpacaLabsLLC/skills-for-architectsSkill4112d agoMITA45Claude Code