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 lugassawan/swe-workbench --skill workflow-pr-review-postgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lugassawan/swe-workbenchWrote 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/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-pr-review-post)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-pr-review-post"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-pr-review-post/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/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-pr-review-post"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-pr-review-post.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 | $0.00095 | $0.03361 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00048 | $0.01681 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00672 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00336 |
Grade A, and why
workflow-pr-review-post 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 3d 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 — 148 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Workflow: PR Review — Posting Core (shared mechanism)
Announce at start: "I'm using the workflow-pr-review-post skill to post these findings to PR #N."
When to invoke
- Called by
swe-workbench:workflow-pr-review(first-pass or followup mode) after its Step 5 footer parse. - Called by
/swe-workbench:review <PR#> --mode <specialist>after the user repliespostto the confirmation prompt (specialist PR-mode sub-flow).
When NOT to invoke
- Local-diff mode → never invoked; there is no PR to post to.
--mode contributor-trust→ never invoked;swe-workbench:contributor-auditor's contract is advisory-only, never posts.- Directly by a user prompt with no pre-computed payload — this skill is pure mechanism; something upstream must have already run an auditor and derived a decision.
Input contract
The posting mechanism itself lives in bin/swe-workbench-pr-review-submit — it validates every
field below and aborts (workflow-pr-review-post: invalid payload — <field> <problem>. Refusing to post., non-zero exit, before any network call) on a violation, so this table documents the
contract callers must satisfy, not a check this skill performs itself.
| Field | CLI flag | Requirement |
|---|---|---|
PR |
--pr |
non-empty, matches [1-9][0-9]* |
OWNER/REPO |
--repo owner/repo |
non-empty |
HEAD_SHA |
--head-sha |
40-char git SHA |
BASE |
--base |
non-empty |
DECISION |
--decision |
APPROVE or COMMENT |
BYLINE |
--byline |
non-empty, identity-only markdown clause (e.g. _Reviewed by \reviewer`_) — must NOT embed the swe-workbench remark or posted/deduped` counts; the script appends both (remark only on a confirmed-public repo — fail-safe omits it on private/unknown) |
BLOCKING_SCOPE |
--blocking-scope |
NONE / OUT-OF-DIFF-ONLY / IN-DIFF, default IN-DIFF (fail-safe). Set from the reviewer agent's in-diff/out-of-diff classification; the specialist PR-mode sub-flow omits it, so the diff-scoping flip never fires there — deliberate, not an oversight. |
CURRENT_USER/AUTHOR_LOGIN |
--current-user/--author-login |
optional; empty = identity unknown (self-review flip and auto-approve both stay suppressed — never guesses) |
FINDINGS[] row |
--findings-json <path|-> (JSON array) |
each row {severity, body, anchor}; anchor=inline rows also carry {path, line}. Inline comment bodies must NOT contain the byline/remark in any form — a comments[] body is finding.body verbatim; the byline/remark is a review-level concern the script builds once. |
CALLER_TAG |
--caller-tag |
non-empty — general, followup, or the specialist mode name; also scopes an optional --debug-dir dump (<tag>-threads.json / <tag>-payload.json) so two callers reviewing the same PR concurrently never collide |
APPROVE_OVER_OPEN_THREADS |
--approve-over-open-threads |
optional; empty = no override. When non-empty: a single line, ≤200 chars, must not embed the swe-workbench remark — validated by the script, not this skill |
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.
- 3d ago Changed · +4 lines a3dc0ad6db80
- 5d ago First seen · 144 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A 495e22774f4e
workflow-pr-review-post is a skill published in the GitHub repository lugassawan/swe-workbench (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 95 tokens to every session and 3,361 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
release
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release"…
brooks-audit
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized…
brooks-test
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow…
pr
Comprehensive PR/issue review - analyzes architecture, tests, identifies unrelated changes mixed in, drafts review comment or issue comment. Use when user asks to review a PR, check a PR, look at PR changes, or comment on an issue.
pr-threads-address
Address PR review feedback by systematically working through every unresolved PR review thread on the current branch's PR - analyze each comment, make the requested code changes (with tests where useful), commit, and optionally reply and resolve.
review
Perform a structured code review by composing validation checklists from relevant atoms based on what code changed. Loads atoms conditionally -- clean-code always, architecture/DDD/security/tests only when the delta touches their domain. Produces a severity-ordered report with specific locations and fixes. Use when…