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 loopdive/js2 --skill pr-conflict-refreshgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/loopdive/js2Wrote 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/loopdive/js2/pr-conflict-refresh)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/loopdive/js2/pr-conflict-refresh"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/loopdive/js2/pr-conflict-refresh/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/loopdive/js2/pr-conflict-refresh"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/loopdive/js2/pr-conflict-refresh.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.01281 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00512 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00256 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00128 |
Grade A, and why
pr-conflict-refresh 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 — 112 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Conflict Refresh
After a merge wave lands multiple PRs to main, older open PRs that built against the pre-merge baseline will become DIRTY. This skill systematically identifies them, pings their assigned devs to refresh, and follows up.
When to use
- Immediately after running
/merge-waveor closing out a batch of PRs - When GitHub's mergeability cache has had time to recompute (wait ~30s after the last merge)
- Before ending a session so conflicts are handled before the next tech lead picks up
Step 1: List all open PRs with their mergeable status
gh pr list --limit 30 --json number,title,headRefName,author,mergeable,mergeStateStatus --jq '.[] | "\(.number)\t\(.mergeStateStatus)\t\(.author.login)\t\(.title[:60])"'
Step 2: Filter DIRTY / CONFLICTING
gh pr list --limit 30 --json number,title,headRefName,author,mergeStateStatus \
--jq '.[] | select(.mergeStateStatus=="DIRTY" or .mergeable=="CONFLICTING") | "\(.number) \(.headRefName) \(.author.login) \(.title[:60])"'
UNKNOWN status is normal right after a merge — wait another 30s and re-check.
Step 3: Determine each conflicting PR's assigned dev
The PR branch name is the strongest hint: issue-NNNN-<slug> or worktree-issue-NNNN-<slug> corresponds to dev-NNN in our team convention (the dev agent that was spawned for the issue). Cross-reference with:
- The PR author (
gh pr view <N> --json author) - The issue file frontmatter in
plan/issues/ - Active tmux panes / team registry in
plan/method/agent-sessions.mdif present
Step 4: Verify the PR had a positive pre-merge delta
Before asking a dev to refresh, check whether the PR was actually worth saving:
run_id=$(gh pr view <N> --json statusCheckRollup --jq '.statusCheckRollup[] | select(.name=="merge shard reports") | .detailsUrl' | grep -oE 'runs/[0-9]+' | head -1 | cut -d/ -f2)
mkdir -p output/pr-<N>
gh run download $run_id -n test262-merged-report -D output/pr-<N> 2>/dev/null
python3 -c "import json; d=json.load(open('output/pr-<N>/test262-report-merged.json')); s=d['summary']; print('pre-merge pass=', s['pass'])"
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 · 112 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 77119e7143eb
pr-conflict-refresh is a skill published in the GitHub repository loopdive/js2 (67 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 1,281 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
triage-contributor-pr
Triage open pull requests from external contributors to prisma/orm and produce a per-PR verdict with evidence. Use when a maintainer asks to triage, evaluate, assess, or review the queue of incoming contributor PRs, to decide whether a fork PR is safe to run CI on, to check whether a PR is in scope for its version…
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.
review-triage-phase
Produces canonical review actions from fetched review state and renders action markdown. Use when the user wants only triage/action-planning for the review-framework workflow.
performance-lint-rules
Performance review guidance for Oxc linter rule implementations. Use only when reviewing Rust rule code under crates/oxclinter/src/rules/ or when explicitly auditing those rules for performance improvements.
reviewing-personhog-protocol
The full review process for personhog coordination-protocol changes — leases, fencing, handoffs, supervisors, failure budgets, warming, and changelog semantics. Use before pushing or requesting review on any personhog protocol changeset, when asked for an exhaustive or careful review of personhog code, and after any…
qa-team
Multi-agent QA review team for code changes. This skill should be used when the user asks to "review my code", "run QA", "qa-team", "review this branch", "code review", "check my changes", or wants a comprehensive multi-perspective code review of the current branch's changes. Spawns parallel specialist agents…