Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to khill1269/servalsheets-v2. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/khill1269/servalsheets-v2/main/.claude/skills/review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/khill1269/servalsheets-v2Wrote 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/khill1269/servalsheets-v2/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/khill1269/servalsheets-v2/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khill1269/servalsheets-v2/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/khill1269/servalsheets-v2/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khill1269/servalsheets-v2/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 | $0.00035 | $0.00181 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00090 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00036 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00018 |
Grade A, and why
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 9d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Use the code-review-orchestrator agent to review the current changes.
The reviewer will check in a single pass:
- TypeScript strict mode compliance
- MCP 2025-11-25 protocol compliance (response format, error codes, tool registration)
- Google API best practices (field masks, retry, circuit breaker, batching)
- Security (OAuth handling, input validation, no credential exposure)
- Test coverage (are new code paths covered?)
- ServalSheets patterns (BaseHandler vs standalone, response format, safety rails)
Output: pass/fail per category with specific file:line references for any issues.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 18 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 3fb653a12945
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository khill1269/servalsheets-v2 (0 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 181 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.