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 juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os --skill apply-review-feedbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-osWrote 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/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/apply-review-feedback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/apply-review-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/apply-review-feedback/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/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/apply-review-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/apply-review-feedback.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 | $0.00015 | $0.00620 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00310 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00124 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00062 |
Grade A, and why
apply-review-feedback scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
<output_format>
<what_to_return>Classification summary (accepted/rejected/ambiguous counts), list of modified files, artifact paths under tmp/review-feedback/<branchPath>/, and reminder to review and commit manually.</what_to_return>
</output_format>
<user_input>$ARGUMENTS</user_input>
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 61 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 15dda930da14
apply-review-feedback is a skill published in the GitHub repository juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os (38 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 620 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review
Review before merge. Stage-1 spec-compliance gate, then risk-selected Stage-2 review axes from the canonical set. analyst always runs, callers can pin extra always-on axes, and explicit deep review runs the full 16-axis set. Run after /test. Do NOT invoke code-qualities-assessment, doc-accuracy, golden-principles, or…
code-qualities-assessment
Assess code maintainability through 5 foundational qualities (cohesion, coupling, encapsulation, testability, non-redundancy) with quantifiable scoring rubrics. Works at method/class/module levels across multiple languages. Produces markdown reports with remediation guidance. Use when you ask to "assess…
adr-review
Multi-agent debate orchestration for Architecture Decision Records. Automatically triggers on ADR create/edit/delete. Coordinates architect, critic, independent-thinker, security, analyst, and high-level-advisor agents in structured debate rounds until consensus. Use when you say "review this ADR", when an ADR is…
style-enforcement
Validate code against style rules from .editorconfig, StyleCop.json, and Directory.Build.props. Use when you say "check style compliance", "validate editorconfig rules", "run style enforcement", "check naming conventions", or "validate line endings". Detects line ending violations, naming convention issues…
analysis-provenance
Identify code ownership before modifying validators or linters. Checks file headers for provenance indicators, reviews documentation, and determines provenance as UPSTREAM, LOCAL, VENDOR, or UNKNOWN. Prevents accidental modification of upstream tools.
analyze
Systematic multi-step codebase analysis producing prioritized findings with file-line evidence. Covers architecture reviews, security assessments, and code quality evaluations through guided exploration, investigation planning, and synthesis. Use when you say "analyze this codebase", "run security assessment"…