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 keithhegit/ultra-orchestration --skill ultra-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/keithhegit/ultra-orchestrationWrote 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/keithhegit/ultra-orchestration/ultra-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/keithhegit/ultra-orchestration/ultra-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/keithhegit/ultra-orchestration/ultra-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/keithhegit/ultra-orchestration/ultra-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/keithhegit/ultra-orchestration/ultra-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 | $0.00053 | $0.00249 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00125 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00050 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00025 |
Grade A, and why
ultra-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 11d 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
Ultra Review
Review is the gate between execution and trust.
Review Order
- Review against the spec and acceptance checks.
- Review for engineering quality, risk, and regressions.
- Decide whether the result is:
- accepted
- rejected to
Execute - rerouted to
Plan
Review Lenses
Always inspect through these lenses:
- falsification: what would prove this wrong
- evidence quality: what concrete evidence supports the claim
- constraints compliance: what requirements were violated or skipped
- downside risk: what could break if this lands
- blind spots: what the worker may have missed
Output
Return:
- decision
- findings
- evidence reviewed
- missing evidence
- reroute target if rejected
- residual risks if accepted
Do not let unsupported conclusions pass into integration.
Read review-lenses for the full checklist.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 43 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 98f2e8079f30
ultra-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository keithhegit/ultra-orchestration (6 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 249 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
gsd-code-review
Review source files changed during a phase for bugs, security issues, and code quality problems.
gsd-ns-review
Route to the appropriate quality / review skill based on the user's intent. gsd-code-review-fix was absorbed by gsd-code-review --fix in #2790.
gsd-pr-branch
Create a clean PR branch by filtering out .planning/ commits — ready for code review.
spec-kitty-implement-review
Orchestrate the implement-review loop for Spec Kitty work packages using any configured agent. Covers agent dispatch, state transitions, rejection cycles, arbiter escalation, and dependency-aware sequencing across all 13 supported coding agents. Triggers: "implement and review WPs", "run the implement-review loop"…
spec-kitty-mission-review
Review a fully merged Spec Kitty mission post-merge (all WPs done/approved) to verify spec→code fidelity, FR coverage, drift, risks, and security. Triggers: "review the merged mission", "post-merge mission review", "verify the completed mission", "audit the mission implementation", "mission-level acceptance review"…
spec-kitty-runtime-review
Review runtime-owned outputs using the Spec Kitty review workflow surface, then direct approval or rejection with structured feedback. Triggers: "review this work package", "check runtime output", "approve this step", "review WP", "is this WP ready to approve", "check this implementation". Does NOT handle: setup-only…