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 JustinThomas2/agentrc --skill review-prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JustinThomas2/agentrcWrote 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/justinthomas2/agentrc/review-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/justinthomas2/agentrc/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/justinthomas2/agentrc/review-pr/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/justinthomas2/agentrc/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/justinthomas2/agentrc/review-pr.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00724 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00290 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr 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 2mo 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
PR = $ARGUMENTS - if that reads as a literal placeholder instead of a number, use the PR number I gave when invoking this skill. If I gave none, ask for it before doing anything else.
A review is only useful if its findings are true. Never report a problem you have not verified against the actual diff, and never pad a review to look thorough - a clean PR deserves a short review saying so. Rank what you do find so the author knows what matters.
Your task
- Gather context, read-only:
gh pr view PRfor the metadata, body, and linked issuegh pr diff PR --patchfor the full diffgh pr view PR --commentsfor existing discussion, andgh api --method GET repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/PR/commentsfor inline review threads (file and line), so you don't repeat feedback already given at either levelgh issue view Nfor the issue the PR closes, so findings can be checked against its acceptance criteria and guardrails
- Review the diff on its merits:
- verify every candidate finding against the diff (and surrounding files if needed) before it may appear in the draft; drop anything you cannot confirm
- check the change against the linked issue's acceptance criteria
and the conventions in AGENTS.md and
skills/README.md - classify each finding: blocking, should-fix, or nit
- Draft the feedback: findings ranked most severe first, each tied to a specific file and hunk, each with a concrete suggested fix. If nothing survived verification, the draft says the PR looks good and why.
- STOP - show me the complete draft as plain text in the conversation and wait for my approval; revise until I approve. Never post anything I have not seen in chat.
- Post only the approved feedback with
gh pr comment PR, ending the comment with the AI-attribution footer from AGENTS.md. (The posting call will ask for my approval - that is intentional; wait for it.) Post plain comments, not formal reviews:gh pr reviewverbs (approve / request changes) fail on the invoker's own PRs, which is the common case here. - Never resolve threads, never approve or request changes, never push, never edit the PR or its body - the comment is the only mutation this skill makes.
- Reply with a link to the posted comment. Then STOP. When the
feedback is on my own PR, I'll invoke
address-feedbackwith PR N to act on it.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 56 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 53953361e75d
review-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository JustinThomas2/agentrc (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 724 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
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.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
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…