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 lestrrat-ai/claude-code-plugins --skill copilot-address-reviewsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lestrrat-ai/claude-code-pluginsWrote 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/lestrrat-ai/claude-code-plugins/copilot-address-reviews)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lestrrat-ai/claude-code-plugins/copilot-address-reviews"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lestrrat-ai/claude-code-plugins/copilot-address-reviews.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 5.1 | $0.00083 | $0.02020 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00042 | $0.01010 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00404 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00202 |
Grade A, and why
copilot-address-reviews 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 6d 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 — 185 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Copilot Address Reviews
Given a GitHub PR link, process Copilot review items one at a time. NEVER assume review is correct. NEVER change code only to satisfy review text.
Inputs
- PR URL
- Local checkout for PR branch, or clear path to fetch/switch to it
- User confirmation for subjective, design, or constraint-driven items
Workflow
-
Resolve bundled scripts relative to the directory containing this
SKILL.md, not the current working directory. Resolve the shared typed runtime owner at../campaign/references/runtime-adapter.mdfrom that same skill directory. NEVERcdto the skill directory — the fetcher's relative scratch default would land output there. -
At workflow entry, call the runtime owner's
resolve_repository_context(checkout)exactly once with the supplied local checkout. Then callrun_argvwith these distinct fields (the script creates the scratch directory if missing):run_argv( argv: ["bash", fetch_review_items_script, "--tmp-dir", repository.scratch_root, pr_url], cwd: repository.project_root, stdin_file: null, stdout_file: null )fetch_review_items_scriptis the absolute path resolved in step 1. Invoke bundled scripts through their interpreter —bashfor.sh,python3for.py— NEVER bare: a bare invocation depends on the executable bit and the shebang surviving every checkout, archive, and install path. -
Read
path_join(repository.scratch_root, "copilot-review-items.json")throughread_bytesas the primary worklist of unresolved items only. -
Inspect the sibling paths under
repository.scratch_rootnamedcopilot-review-items.raw.json,gh-pr-view.json, andgh-pr-review-threads.jsonthroughread_byteswhen dedup or extraction needs verification. Never resolve these from cwd. -
Select next unhandled unresolved item from worklist. NEVER work resolved items.
-
For current item, choose exactly one outcome before moving on:
- valid → fix
- invalid → no code change
- subjective/constraint-driven/ambiguous → ask user
- deferred/won't fix → ask user, then no code change
- already fixed on branch → no code change
-
After each valid item:
- make smallest code change that addresses verified issue
- run focused tests first
- add/update tests when they materially prove claim or prevent regression
- run broader relevant tests when change touches shared behavior
- commit only files for that item
- after commit, resolve corresponding GitHub review thread/comment if it is still unresolved
-
After each invalid, deferred, won't-fix, or already-fixed item:
- record why no code change is needed
- if current source/tests do not already make decision obvious, add concise code comment near relevant logic so future reviewers can see reasoning or constraint
- if outcome is deferred or won't fix and user confirmed that outcome, resolve corresponding GitHub review thread/comment if it is still unresolved
- do not make speculative edits
-
Mark current item handled, then look up whether more unhandled items remain.
-
If more items remain, return to step 5. Continue until worklist is empty.
-
After all items, report every item, decision, evidence, and commit hash when applicable.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 185 lines · 83 tokens per session scan A d14e9e44b8ce
copilot-address-reviews is a skill published in the GitHub repository lestrrat-ai/claude-code-plugins (18 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 83 tokens to every session and 2,020 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
github-pr-workflow
Prepare a GitHub pull request from a feature branch — branch hygiene, commit shape, title/body, verification notes, screenshots for UI work, and replies to review comments.
github-automation
GitHub workflow automation, PR management, issue tracking, and code review coordination. Integrates with GitHub Actions and repository management. Use when: PR creation, code review, issue management, release automation, workflow setup. Skip when: local-only changes, non-GitHub repositories.
review-delta
Review only changes since last commit using impact analysis. Token-efficient delta review with automatic blast-radius detection.
work-unit-commits
Plan commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.
github-contributor
End-to-end playbook for shipping high-quality pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — discovery, CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size check, minimal-diff implementation, PR description with AI-assisted disclosure, conflict resolution, and post-submission maintainer interaction. Use whenever creating…