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 Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills --skill receiving-pr-reviewsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skillsWrote 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/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/receiving-pr-reviews)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/receiving-pr-reviews"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/receiving-pr-reviews/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/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/receiving-pr-reviews"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/receiving-pr-reviews.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 | $0.00055 | $0.01946 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00973 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00389 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00195 |
Grade A, and why
receiving-pr-reviews 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 7d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- receiving-pr-reviews — 100% identical, 36 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Receiving PR Reviews
-
Fetch every unresolved thread, every unresponded review, and Codex's approval state. Prefer
--summary— it already carries every id step 4/5 needs; drop it only when you needreviews_with_body's full list or a thread's complete comment history:uv run ./.agents/skills/receiving-pr-reviews/scripts/pr_review_threads.py fetch --pr <N> --summaryIf the helper cannot use
ghand GitHub MCP tools are available, use the lightweight GitHub MCP fallback for this workflow instead. Do not install or reconfigureghmerely to avoid the fallback, and do not run both paths for the same snapshot.Read
reviews_count,threads_count,unresolved_count,unresponded_count, andblockerstogether — never treat an emptyunresolvedarray on its own as "nothing to do". Athreads_countof 0 means no inline thread landed, not that no review landed. A non-emptyblockersmeans the empty result set is expected and the fix is on the PR itself — undraft it, resolve the conflicts — not in the review queue. (Dropping--summarygets the same fields underreviewability.blockersinstead of top-levelblockers, plus the fullreviews_with_bodyand each thread's completecommentslist — a thread'scomments_truncated: truethere means it has passed 100 comments; page itscommentsconnection directly before concluding anything about it.unresponded_countitself only exists on--summaryoutput — the full form has no matching field, uselen(unresponded_reviews)there instead.)unresolved/unresponded_reviewsentries are this run's actionable input; treat every one as something to address. Forcodex_approved, see step 7. Checking several PRs at once:--pr 41,42,44prints one line (or, with--summary, one JSON block) per PR instead of one call each. -
For each unresolved thread or unresponded review: read it, validate the claim locally, assess against the change goal and repository instructions.
-
Implement, commit, and push a fix only when it improves the product — push before replying, so the SHA named in the reply is inspectable and resolving the thread never outruns what is actually on the remote.
-
Reply on that thread with the disposition — conclusion, evidence, commit SHA, or why no change was warranted:
uv run ./.agents/skills/receiving-pr-reviews/scripts/pr_review_threads.py reply --pr <N> --comment-id <databaseId> --body '...' -
Resolve the thread:
uv run ./.agents/skills/receiving-pr-reviews/scripts/pr_review_threads.py resolve --thread-id <id>Steps 4 and 5 combined — one thread or many in one process:
uv run ./.agents/skills/receiving-pr-reviews/scripts/pr_review_threads.py reply-and-resolve \ --pr <N> --thread-id <id> --comment-id <databaseId> --body '...' uv run ./.agents/skills/receiving-pr-reviews/scripts/pr_review_threads.py reply-and-resolve-batch \ --pr <N> --input-file threads.json # [{thread_id, comment_id, body}, ...]The batch form stops at the first failure and prints one JSON line per thread.
-
A decision spanning threads (PR sequencing, rebase disposition), or a response to a
reviews_with_body/unresponded_reviewsentry, goes on the PR itself viagh pr comment <N> -R <owner>/<repo>— the same owner/repo this run used in step 1 — before the work it governs. When answering a specific entry, quote that review's ownurlfield from step 1's output in the comment body. That quotedurl, postdating the review, is what clears the review out ofunresponded_reviewson the next check; chronological order alone does not. -
Once all current threads and reviews are addressed, re-check with
watch, looping short calls rather than one long block:uv run ./.agents/skills/receiving-pr-reviews/scripts/pr_review_threads.py watch --pr <N>Block on it inline when there is no other work to advance. With other work queued, background the call using whatever mechanism the harness provides and continue that work — then poll the backgrounded call for its own result before reporting back or finishing, because it produces no completion notification.
What ships with it
5 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.
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.
- 7d ago Changed · +2 lines 202f88ff829a
- 9d ago Changed · +13 lines 8cefa78ae3c5
- 12d ago First seen · 58 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 6d00a5f1b48e
receiving-pr-reviews is a skill published in the GitHub repository Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills (66 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 1,946 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…
github-contributor
End-to-end playbook for shipping high-quality pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — discovery, CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size check, minimal-diff implementation, PR description with AI-assisted disclosure, conflict resolution, and post-submission maintainer interaction. Use whenever creating…
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…
oss-maintainer
Run an open-source project's issue/PR/release loop like a careful human maintainer — triage to root cause, absorb community PRs before duplicating them, gate every merge, ship honest releases, and thank the people doing your QA for free.