hacs.integration_blueprint: Skill for Claude Code

.agents/skills/ha-quality-review/SKILL.md

ha-quality-review is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint. It costs 186 tokens per session (2,130 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A structured review procedure for a Home Assistant custom integration, either across the whole project or only across a code change.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to run linting, type checks, Home Assistant structure checks, and tests, then inspect layering, reliability, and release readiness.
Why use it?
It combines automated checks with human review of architecture, failure handling, and whether users can understand the integration.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: installed under .agents/ (shared by several agents); mentions AGENTS.md.

This is jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint's own configuration. It tells Claude Code and Codex how to work on hacs.integration_blueprint itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything hacs.integration_blueprint configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint/main/.agents/skills/ha-quality-review/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint

Made for: Claude Code, 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 ha-quality-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint/ha-quality-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint/ha-quality-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint/ha-quality-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint/ha-quality-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for ha-quality-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint/ha-quality-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint/ha-quality-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 186 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,130 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. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

  • medium Prompt Injection · line 81
    Large whitespace padding was detected (a block of blank lines or a long run of spaces). This can push injected instructions below or to the right of the visible area so a human reviewer never sees them while the agent still reads them. Manual review of the hidden content is recommended.
    Fix: Remove the large whitespace padding (blank-line blocks or long space runs) and review any content hidden below or to the right of it. Keep skill files compact and reviewable so no instructions can be
How audits are shown
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 $0.00186 $0.02130
Opus 5 $0.00093 $0.01065
Sonnet 5 $0.00037 $0.00426
Haiku 4.5 $0.00019 $0.00213

Measured 12d ago against content hash c59d863e03e9, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

ha-quality-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 12d 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.

.agents/skills/ha-quality-review/SKILL.md · 173 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 173 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Review the integration

A review that only restates the linter is worthless. Run the machines first, then spend your attention on what they cannot see: layering, failure behaviour, and whether a user would understand what this integration does.

0. Scope the review

Ask, or infer from the request:

  • Full audit of the integration, or diff review of the current branch?
  • Is there a target tier (this project aims for Silver, ideally Gold)?

For a diff review: git diff main...HEAD --stat, then read the changed files in full — not just the hunks.

1. Automated gates (always first)

script/lint          # ruff format+fix, shfmt, prettier/markdownlint, yamllint, zizmor, shellcheck
script/type-check    # pyright — never auto-fixed
script/hassfest      # manifest, services.yaml, translations, integration structure
script/test --cov-html

Anything these report is a finding, not something to fix silently mid-review — but do note that script/lint already auto-heals formatting, so only its remaining output counts.

2. Architecture

  • Layering is Entity → Coordinator → source. Any entity importing api/ directly, or any coordinator holding HTTP details, is a finding.
  • Package structure matches the fixed set (api/, coordinator/, config_flow_handler/, entity/, entity_utils/, <platform>/, service_actions/, utils/). A helpers/, common/, shared/, or lib/ package is a finding.
  • Files are 200–400 lines, one entity class per file.
  • Runtime state lives in entry.runtime_data, never hass.data[DOMAIN].
  • No circular imports; TYPE_CHECKING guards for type-only imports.

Two upstream requirements this project deliberately does not meet. Neither is a finding here, and both should be stated as decisions rather than silently passed over:

  • Core requires all device or service communication to be wrapped in a PyPI library. As a custom integration this project allows an in-repo client (AGENTS.md § Custom Integration Flexibility) — with the consequence that the client would have to be extracted before this could ever be submitted to Core.
  • creating_component_code_review.md still recommends hass.data[DOMAIN]. That page is out of date and is contradicted by the Bronze runtime-data rule. Do not "correct" entry.runtime_data back to it.

Read the full file on GitHub · 173 lines

Files

What ships with it

2 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. 12d ago First seen · 173 lines · 186 tokens per session scan A c59d863e03e9

Subscribe to this mod's changes

ha-quality-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository jpawlowski/hacs.integration_blueprint (49 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 186 tokens to every session and 2,130 once invoked, about $0.0009 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

contrib-pr-review

Review a contribution PR for safety, quality, and readiness. Checks for security concerns, test coverage, size appropriateness, and intent alignment. Use when reviewing external contributions.

homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp · 39 tokens

issue-to-pr-resolver

Implement a GitHub issue end-to-end — create a worktree branch, implement the feature with tests, create a draft PR, then iteratively resolve all CI failures and review comments until the PR is clean. Use when you need to fully implement a GitHub issue from start to merge-ready. Triggers on "implement issue", "resolve…

homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp · 85 tokens

my-pr-checker

Manage your own GitHub pull requests — check CI status, inline review comments, PR-level comments, resolve review threads, fix issues, and iterate until all checks pass and threads are resolved. Use for managing your own PRs (not external contributions). Triggers on "check my PR", "check PR", "/my-pr-checker ".

homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp · 75 tokens

issue-analysis

Deep analysis of a single GitHub issue with codebase exploration, implementation planning, and architectural assessment. Use when you need to analyze a GitHub issue, assess its complexity, plan implementation approaches, and post a structured analysis comment. Triggers on "analyze issue", "deep analysis"…

homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp · 67 tokens

homeassistant

Source-layer Home Assistant guide material preserved behind the runtime guide.

ha-china/ha_claw · 15 tokens

bat-story-eval

Compare MCP tool behavior between target and baseline versions using pre-built and custom stories with diff-based triage.

homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp · 26 tokens