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 jason21wc/ai-governance-mcp --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jason21wc/ai-governance-mcpWrote 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/jason21wc/ai-governance-mcp/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jason21wc/ai-governance-mcp/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jason21wc/ai-governance-mcp/code-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/jason21wc/ai-governance-mcp/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jason21wc/ai-governance-mcp/code-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 | $0.00099 | $0.00818 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00049 | $0.00409 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00164 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 10d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 63 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Runtime Context
After the skill loads, establish the branch and inspect staged and unstaged diffs with ordinary read-only Git calls. Distinguish a clean diff from a Git error.
Instructions
You are running a multi-pass code review. Read procedure.md in this skill folder for the full orchestration protocol.
Quick Start
-
Collect the Runtime Context above and determine review scope. If the user specified files or a diff range, use that. Otherwise:
- Staged changes exist → review staged changes (
git diff --cached) - On a branch other than main → review branch diff (
git diff main...HEAD) - Neither → ask the user what to review
- Staged changes exist → review staged changes (
-
Read
procedure.mdfor the full orchestration and reconciliation protocol. -
Read pass instruction files from
passes/directory. Each file contains focused review instructions for one subagent. -
Dispatch 3 Agent subagents in parallel — correctness, security, architecture. Each gets the shared assumptions brief + its pass-specific instructions.
-
Reconcile findings per the reconciliation protocol in procedure.md. Deduplicate, apply evidence gate, enforce severity gating and output cap.
-
Present the unified review in the output format defined in procedure.md.
Opt-In Passes
When the user says "full review", "include performance", or "include test coverage":
- Read additional pass files from
passes-optional/ - Dispatch additional subagents alongside the core 3
- Include their findings in reconciliation
Cross-vendor second opinion (passes-optional/cross-vendor.md) — an independent review
from a different model lineage (OpenAI Codex / gpt). Default where scripts/codex_review.py
exists in the repo AND codex is on PATH: run the security role automatically (promoted
from opt-in on the session-240 measurement — cheap, low-noise, caught a real miss). Elsewhere
it is opt-in: run when the user says "cross-vendor", "codex review", "second opinion", or
"full review". Unlike the other passes this is NOT a Claude subagent: the orchestrator runs it
via Bash (in parallel with the subagent dispatch) and folds its JSON findings into
reconciliation. It self-skips silently when codex is absent or the primary session is itself
Codex, so it is safe to leave on by default.
What ships with it
7 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.
- 10d ago First seen · 63 lines · 99 tokens per session scan A 433c00994584
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository jason21wc/ai-governance-mcp (0 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 99 tokens to every session and 818 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…