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 kivo360/OmoiOS --skill pr-creatorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kivo360/OmoiOSWrote 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/kivo360/omoios/pr-creator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kivo360/omoios/pr-creator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kivo360/omoios/pr-creator/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/kivo360/omoios/pr-creator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kivo360/omoios/pr-creator.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 | $0.00011 | $0.01088 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00435 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00218 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00109 |
Grade A, and why
pr-creator 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 1mo 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 — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Creator
Create well-structured pull requests that are easy to review.
PR Title Format
{type}({scope}): {description} [TKT-{num}]
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
feat |
New feature |
fix |
Bug fix |
refactor |
Code refactoring |
test |
Test additions |
docs |
Documentation |
chore |
Maintenance |
perf |
Performance |
Examples:
feat(auth): implement OAuth2 login [TKT-123]fix(api): handle null response in user endpoint [TKT-456]refactor(db): optimize query performance [TKT-789]
PR Description Template
## Summary
{1-2 sentence high-level description of what this PR does}
## Changes
{Bullet list of specific changes}
- Add {component/feature} for {purpose}
- Update {file} to {change}
- Remove {deprecated thing}
## Implementation Details
{Technical details for reviewers}
### Key Decisions
- **{Decision 1}**: Chose {approach} because {reason}
- **{Decision 2}**: Used {pattern} for {benefit}
### Notable Files
- `path/to/main/file.py` - Core implementation
- `path/to/tests.py` - Test coverage
## Testing
### Automated Tests
- [ ] Unit tests added/updated
- [ ] Integration tests pass
- [ ] E2E tests pass (if applicable)
### Manual Testing
{Steps to manually verify}
1. {Step 1}
2. {Step 2}
3. Expected: {outcome}
## Checklist
- [ ] Code follows project style guidelines
- [ ] Self-review completed
- [ ] Documentation updated
- [ ] No new warnings/errors
- [ ] Tests cover new functionality
## Related
- Closes TKT-{num}
- Relates to #{other-pr}
- Depends on #{blocking-pr}
## Screenshots
{For UI changes, add before/after screenshots}
| Before | After |
|--------|-------|
| {img} | {img} |
Creating PR via CLI
# Using GitHub CLI (gh)
gh pr create \
--title "feat(auth): implement OAuth2 login [TKT-123]" \
--body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Summary
Implements OAuth2 login flow with Google and GitHub providers.
## Changes
- Add OAuth2 provider configuration
- Implement callback handling
- Add session management for OAuth users
## Testing
- [ ] Unit tests for OAuth flow
- [ ] Manual testing with Google/GitHub
Closes TKT-123
EOF
)" \
--base main \
--label "feature" \
--label "auth"
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 176 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A d620b1e87641
pr-creator is a skill published in the GitHub repository kivo360/OmoiOS (81 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 1,088 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-review
Review open PRs two ways - default is a per-PR deep review with severity-tagged findings, inline comments, and a verdict; --survey runs a risk-tiered triage digest of what's safe to merge first.
pr-triage
First-touch triage for external pull requests - verdict, label, and a welcoming comment within minutes of open.
feedback-builder
Point Aeon at a service's /feedback endpoint - pull what agents reported (bugs, missing features), triage and cluster it, then build the best accepted request as a PR for a human to approve.
creating-pr
Creates GitHub Pull Requests with existing PR detection, branch pushing, and intelligent title/body generation. Use when user requests to create pull request, open PR, update PR, push for review, ready for review, send for review, get this reviewed, make a PR, share code, request review, create draft PR, submit for…
resolving-pr-issues
Multi-agent review resolution with trust-but-verify methodology. Accepts a PR number/URL or a local code-review report file. Extracts review comments, verifies each with parallel agents using confidence scoring (0-100), filters false positives, presents a triage report for approval, then applies fixes and replies. Use…
code-review
Multi-agent code review using the Pragmatic Quality framework. Orchestrates parallel review agents (CLAUDE.md compliance, bug scanning, git history, security) with independent confidence scoring to produce high-signal findings. Use when user runs /code-review, /review:code-review, requests a "code review", "review my…