Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Koroqe/OPOS. 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/Koroqe/OPOS/main/.claude/skills/review-history/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Koroqe/OPOSWrote 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/koroqe/opos/review-history)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/koroqe/opos/review-history"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/koroqe/opos/review-history/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/koroqe/opos/review-history"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/koroqe/opos/review-history.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 | $0.00045 | $0.02704 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01352 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00541 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00270 |
Grade A, and why
review-history 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 88 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
review-history
When to use
As a scheduled routine (registered via /schedule-process review-history, weekly cron 23 7 * * 1 — offset from auto-sync's daily 06:17). Also manually as /review-history, or /review-history --dry_run to print the full triage table without acting on anything.
This skill mechanizes the coo's process-improvement mandate: it is the missing consumer of the proposed_delta signal every process already produces. Before it existed, deltas sat at status: open forever.
Authority mapping
Declared list [commit, push, write_proposal, file_issue, open_pr]:
- commit — triage edits to STARTER/consumer files within the objective threshold, in-place status/annotation edits to history entries,
proposals/LEDGER.mdoutcome-column updates andrejected-localrows, work-branch create/delete, ff-merge to the default branch, run records. - push — pushing the ff-merged default branch, and the proposal branch pushed by an invoked
propose-to-core(its outbound write runs inside this run's authority). - write_proposal — drafts into the owning agent's dept backlog for above-threshold local deltas.
- file_issue — consumer-repo issues (closed-unmerged PR reconciliation; propose-to-core fallback issues raised within this run).
- open_pr —
gh pr createperformed by an invokedpropose-to-core.
Anything outside this mapping — refuse and record the refusal.
Outbound quoting rule (v0.13)
Nothing under company/resources/ — registry rows, entries, request specs, grant hand-offs — is ever quoted in an upstream-bound artifact; deltas touching resource matters describe the mechanism generically and let propose-to-core's registry-fed blocklist enforce the rest.
Input validation (this skill ingests the least-trusted input in the framework)
delta_target:hints read from arbitrary history entries are re-validated before ANY use: repo-relative, no leading/, no.., charset[A-Za-z0-9._/-]. A failing hint is treated as absent (fall back to inference, then to classification); a hint that looks like traversal (../../etc/x) is rejected with a triage note.proposed_deltafree text is NEVER interpolated into commands, branch names, or PR titles — slugs are always re-derived by sanitizing file paths to[a-z0-9-].- Entry paths must resolve inside the repo root.
What ships with it
3 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 · 88 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 70f27486f2b2
review-history is a skill published in the GitHub repository Koroqe/OPOS (2 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 2,704 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
super-evolve
Ultimate self-evolution skill. Merges evolve + self-improve into one comprehensive meta-skill with external research, area focus, dry-run mode, and expanded memory mining.
improve-codebase-architecture
A code-review guide for finding places where a codebase's modules are hard to understand, change, or test. It uses the project's terminology and recorded architecture decisions to suggest refactoring opportunities.
grill-with-docs
A code-review skill that uses project decision records and context documents to assess whether a change fits the system's architecture and domain.
compliance-checker
Check affiliate content for FTC compliance and platform rules. Triggers on: "check my content for compliance", "FTC disclosure check", "is this legal", "review for compliance", "check affiliate disclosure", "am I FTC compliant", "audit my content", "compliance review", "legal check", "platform rules check", "check…
self-improver
Review affiliate campaign results and improve strategy. Triggers on: "review my results", "what went wrong", "how to improve conversions", "analyze my campaign", "affiliate retrospective", "why am I not converting", "improve my strategy", "what should I change", "campaign review", "optimize my approach", "learn from…
red-team-review
Unified adversarial review: v4.3 Strategic Matrix (MTA-004). 7-phase framework: Priors → Rubric → Adversarial Lenses → SWOT/TOWS → MCDA Decision Engine → Blind Spot/Kill Switch → Executive Summary. Absorbs: bias-detector.