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 KevinZai/commander --skill ccc-sol-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KevinZai/commanderWrote 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/kevinzai/commander/ccc-sol-loop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kevinzai/commander/ccc-sol-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kevinzai/commander/ccc-sol-loop/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/kevinzai/commander/ccc-sol-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kevinzai/commander/ccc-sol-loop.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 | $0.00058 | $0.02009 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00804 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00402 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00201 |
Grade A, and why
ccc-sol-loop 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 yesterday.
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 — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
$ccc-sol-loop — Bounded second-provider review
CC Commander · $ccc-sol-loop · an OpenAI reviewer checks your change in a loop with a ledger, a round budget and minimal fixes.
Adapted from t3dotgg/tstack
skills/sol-loop/SKILL.mdat92e38e2cf677a84a142e8df296861c588542135c. MIT, Copyright (c) 2026 Theo Browne; seeLICENSE.txt. Changes for CC Commander are marked "CCC safety:".
Make the most minimal changes that satisfy the reviewer. Watch for scope creep and push back when a finding is out of scope. The user's session model stays in place; only the reviewer is a different model.
When to use / when not to
- Use before (or sometimes after) filing a pull request, to make a change more correct with an independent OpenAI reviewer.
- Not for a one-pass Claude review (ask the user to type
$ccc-review), and not when no OpenAI route is available (see step 2).
Budget
- Default: 3 rounds total. Round 1 is full. Later rounds check only changed code and open findings.
- Extend to 5 only for security, permissions, auth, data loss, or state/concurrency, while a blocker or should stays open with evidence, or when the user asks.
- Stop early if a round returns only nits. Declined nits and comment, doc or format-only fixes need no new round.
- One reviewer only. The reviewer must not start subagents or other reviewers.
- Keep a ledger: id, severity, outcome, usage if returned. Never guess usage.
What happens
- Scope. Run
git status --short. Do not stash, discard, or include unrelated changes. Limit review to the change paths if they separate cleanly; otherwise stop and ask. Rungit fetch origin, then find the base:- PR:
gh pr view <n> --json baseRefName,headRefOid. Check out the branch only if clean. ConfirmHEADis the PR head, or ahead only by this change. Base:git merge-base HEAD origin/<baseRefName>. - Local:
git merge-base HEAD origin/<default-branch>. No remote: a base the user names, orHEADfor uncommitted changes only.
- PR:
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.
- yesterday First seen · 114 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A ef7417db6804
ccc-sol-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository KevinZai/commander (6 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 2,009 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 2026-10-28.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review
Use when changes affect interactions across multiple modules, involve high-risk areas (authorization/authentication, payments/funds, data deletion/migration, public APIs/cross-service interfaces/security boundaries), or the user requests a review. Review in this order—correctness → requirements → security → simplicity…
pr-review-expert
Tier: POWERFUL Category: Engineering Domain: Code Review / Quality Assurance.
tech-debt-tracker
Scan codebases for technical debt, score severity, track trends, and generate prioritized remediation plans. Use when users mention tech debt, code quality, refactoring priority, debt scoring, cleanup sprints, or code health assessment. Also use for legacy code modernization planning and maintenance cost estimation.
generic-fullstack-code-reviewer
Review full-stack code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, input validation, GPU-accelerated animations, and design system consistency. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing pull requests.
receive-review
Process code review feedback with technical rigor. Activates when the user shares review comments, PR feedback, or asks to address reviewer suggestions.
ui-design-team
Multi-agent UI review with 4 specialist perspectives: UX Researcher, Visual Designer, i18n/Multilingual QA, and Accessibility/Performance Auditor. Each agent scores independently from their expertise. Lead Designer synthesizes into prioritized fixes with exact code. Works with any stack: React, Astro, vanilla…