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 agentmods add skills/langerrr/zforge/reviewnpx skills add Langerrr/zforge --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Langerrr/zforgeWrote 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/langerrr/zforge/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/langerrr/zforge/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/langerrr/zforge/review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00018 | $0.01079 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00540 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00216 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00108 |
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 today.
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 — 67 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ledger vs. Implementation
Check what the code does against what the feature's documents say it does.
This is not a general code review. Bugs, security, performance and style belong to Codex code review and $compound-engineering:ce-review, which are better at them and do not need the ledger. This review is the one nobody else can run, because it is the only one holding the plan, the patterns, the decisions and the evidence claims at the same time.
Arguments
--feature <name>— the feature directory to review against. Required; without a ledger there is nothing here to do.
What to read first
02_plan.md— schema, contracts, phase decomposition, Verification Matrix, Environment Assumptions, Invariants- The core patterns doc, if the Doc Map lists one — the rules agents were told to follow
decision_review.md§A and §C — the decisions that reached beyond the implementation, and whatever the user has already adjudicated- Every phase file's
## Decisions— the implementation conventions that were not promoted. This is the larger set, and it binds the code just as tightly - Every phase file's
## Evidence Requiredand## Acceptance 05_progress_overview.md— open standing flags
Then read the code those documents describe.
What to check
Four questions, each answerable against a document rather than a judgment call:
1. Do the decisions hold in the code?
Every 🟡 and ✅ entry in decision_review.md, and every row in a phase file's ## Decisions, claims something about how the system works. Check the call sites. A decision recorded once and violated in four places is the common shape, and it is commonest among the unpromoted conventions — the ledger's rows had the user's eye on them, the phase files' rows had nobody's.
2. Are the invariants implemented and re-checked?
02_plan.md names invariants with an owner phase and a re-check phase. Verify each is actually established, and actually holds at every call site — not just the one the owning phase wrote. Anything spanning phases is verified by no single phase file, which is why it survives to here.
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.
- today Changed ec8b710b82da
- 4d ago First seen · 67 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A e32ab8f9d2e5
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Langerrr/zforge (10 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,079 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
loop-setup
Session 0. Sets up the loop in this project - detects the stack, checks which connections actually work (git, database, browser, payments sandbox), asks the few decisions only the owner can make, and writes the .loop/ files. Run this once per project, before any planning or building.
loop-plan
The planning session. Turns a goal into an ordered list of thin complete slices, decides which role and model runs each following session, and writes it all to the plan file. Use at the start of an epic, before any code.
plan-change
Turns .workflow/ /triage.json and the code into an audited implementation spec at .workflow/ /sdd.json. Use before writing code for a ticket, bug fix or feature.
draft-pr
Writes a PR title and description to .workflow/ /pr.md from the branch's commits, the plan and the recorded verification. Use when opening a PR or asked for a PR description.
frame-product
Turns a feature idea into a product decision - who, which metric, what cost, smallest sellable slice - at .workflow/idea- /frame.md. Use when a feature is proposed with no ticket or agreed scope.
implement-change
Executes an audited plan from .workflow/ /sdd.json, holding the diff to the files it lists, then verifies it into .workflow/ /evidence.md. Use to carry out a plan, after plan-change.