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 kairyou/agent-tools --skill at-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kairyou/agent-toolsWrote 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/kairyou/agent-tools/at-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kairyou/agent-tools/at-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kairyou/agent-tools/at-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/kairyou/agent-tools/at-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kairyou/agent-tools/at-review.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 | $0.00047 | $0.01846 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00923 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00369 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00185 |
Grade A, and why
at-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 2d 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 — 111 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
high effort → 3+5 angles × 6 candidates → 1-vote verify (recall-biased) → ≤10 findings
You are reviewing for recall at high effort: catch every real bug a careful reviewer would catch in one sitting. At this level, catching real bugs matters more than avoiding false positives. Err on the side of surfacing.
Phase 0 — Gather the diff
If the argument is a hosted pull/merge request URL or a numeric PR/MR identifier, read references/review-targets.md from this skill directory before running commands. Follow its read-only resolution and authentication fallback rules; do not switch the user's working tree or write to the hosting service.
Run git diff "@{upstream}...HEAD" (or git diff main...HEAD / git diff HEAD~1 if there's no upstream) to get the unified diff under review. If there are uncommitted changes, or the range diff is empty, also run git diff HEAD and include the working-tree changes in scope — the review often runs before the commit. If a PR number, branch name, or file path was passed as an argument, review that target instead. Treat this diff as the review scope.
Phase 1 — Find candidates (3 correctness angles + 3 cleanup angles + 1 altitude angle + 1 conventions angle, up to 6 each)
Run 8 independent finder angles using multi-agent capabilities. Each surfaces up to 6 candidate findings with file, line, a one-line summary, and a concrete failure_scenario.
Angle A — line-by-line diff scan
Read every hunk in the diff, line by line. Then Read the enclosing function for each hunk — bugs in unchanged lines of a touched function are in scope (the PR re-exposes or fails to fix them). For every line ask: what input, state, timing, or platform makes this line wrong? Look for inverted/wrong conditions, off-by-one, null/undefined deref, missing await, falsy-zero checks, wrong-variable copy-paste, error swallowed in catch, unescaped regex metachars.
Angle B — removed-behavior auditor
For every line the diff DELETES or replaces, name the invariant or behavior it enforced, then search the new code for where that invariant is re-established. If you can't find it, that's a candidate: a removed guard, a dropped error path, a narrowed validation, a deleted test that was covering a real case.
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.
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.
- 2d ago Changed 619d10458f51
- 10d ago First seen · 111 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A bea468013950
at-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository kairyou/agent-tools (181 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 1,846 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
tech-debt-collector
Evidence-gated tech debt and bloat detection. Scouts signals, ranks by materiality, validates by refutation, reports up to 5 findings with actions.
pr-review
Intent-aware map-reduce PR review with CI/CD support, confidence gating, and intelligent comment deduplication.
pr-walkthrough
Generate an evidence-grounded markdown walkthrough for a pull request.
address-pr-feedback
Unified PR feedback workflow - collect, triage, and fix review comments in a single command.
code-clean-comments
Systematically removes unnecessary comments from a user scope by first resolving it into a durable change manifest.
pr-visual
Transform pull request diffs into Mermaid diagrams for visual code review and change understanding.