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 LandonSchropp/agent-toolkit --skill pre-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LandonSchropp/agent-toolkitWrote 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/landonschropp/agent-toolkit/pre-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/landonschropp/agent-toolkit/pre-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/landonschropp/agent-toolkit/pre-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/landonschropp/agent-toolkit/pre-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/landonschropp/agent-toolkit/pre-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 | $0.00038 | $0.00463 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00185 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00093 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
pre-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 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.
What it actually says
Pre-Review
You wrote this diff, so you are the worst available reviewer of it. Hand it to a subagent that reads it cold.
REQUIRED: Launch one general-purpose subagent with the Agent tool, with run_in_background: false. Do not read references/checks.md yourself. Give the subagent this prompt, with <absolute path> resolved against this skill's directory:
Review the changes under review:
git diff --cachedif anything is staged, otherwisegit diff HEADplus every untracked filegit statuslists. Read<absolute path>/references/checks.mdand apply it. Report findings; change nothing.
Fix everything it turns up. When it flags more than one logical change, narrow the working set to the first commit's files here rather than presenting all of them: REQUIRED: Invoke the ls-git:git-atomic-commit skill. Then continue to the interactive review, and state in one line what you fixed and anything you deliberately left alone.
Rationalizations
| Thought | Reality |
|---|---|
| "The diff is small, I'll check it myself" | You already read it once and missed it. Dispatch the agent. |
| "I know what's in it, I just wrote it" | That's the problem the subagent exists to fix. |
| "I'll run it in the background and present" | Findings after the user reviews are worthless. Block on it. |
| "I'll let the subagent fix what it finds" | It reports; you fix. Its edits never got reviewed. |
| "The checks are loaded, I can just run them" | Loading the rubric is not the point. Fresh eyes are. |
| "Dispatching costs a round trip" | Cheaper than the round trip through the user. |
| "Splitting means committing, so I'll ask" | Narrowing to one commit's files is not committing. |
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines · +3 tokens per session d57dc962a85f
- 1mo ago First seen · 26 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A bf45f0d87117
pre-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository LandonSchropp/agent-toolkit (3 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 463 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
buyer-job-intent-analysis
Recover source-bound buyer jobs, struggling moments, desired progress, forces, workarounds, information acts, journey states, criteria, constraints, roles, locales, and authentic language. Use on approved ICP hypotheses plus customer, search, review, forum, procurement, support, or public-market evidence before…
sonarqube-mcp
Provides SonarQube and SonarCloud integration patterns via the Model Context Protocol (MCP) server. Enables quality gate monitoring, issue discovery and triaging, pre-push code analysis, and rule education directly in the agent workflow. Use when the user wants to check quality gates, search for Sonar issues, analyze…
nestjs-code-review
Provides comprehensive code review capability for NestJS applications, analyzing controllers, services, modules, guards, interceptors, pipes, dependency injection, and database integration patterns. Use when reviewing NestJS code changes, before merging pull requests, after implementing new features, or for…
nextjs-code-review
Provides comprehensive code review capability for Next.js applications, validates Server Components, Client Components, Server Actions, caching strategies, metadata, API routes, middleware, and performance patterns. Use when reviewing Next.js App Router code changes, before merging pull requests, after implementing…
react-code-review
Provides comprehensive code review capability for React applications, validates component architecture, hooks usage, React 19 patterns, state management, performance optimization, accessibility compliance, and TypeScript integration. Use when reviewing React code changes, before merging pull requests, after…
pr-review-comments
Posts review findings from a JSON file as inline comments on a GitHub Pull Request, attaching each comment to its file and line. Use when you have a list/JSON of review findings (each with a file path, line number, and a message such as summary/failurescenario) and want them published on a PR as inline review…