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 magnus919/hermes-profiles --skill sdd-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/magnus919/hermes-profilesWrote 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/magnus919/hermes-profiles/sdd-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/magnus919/hermes-profiles/sdd-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/magnus919/hermes-profiles/sdd-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/magnus919/hermes-profiles/sdd-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/magnus919/hermes-profiles/sdd-review.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 | $0.00051 | $0.01485 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00743 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00297 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00148 |
Grade A, and why
sdd-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 11d 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 — 124 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
SDD Phase-Gate Review
Enforcing the SDD pipeline's gated structure: every artifact is reviewed before the next phase proceeds. This skill owns the Review gates between every pair of SDD phases.
SDD Pipeline Position
[SPECIFY] → REVIEW → [PLAN] → REVIEW → [TASKS] → REVIEW → [IMPLEMENT] → REVIEW → [VERIFY]
↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑
└─────────┘ └────────┘ └─────────┘ └──────────┘
Gate 1: Spec Gate 2: Plan Gate 3: Tasks Gate 4: Implementation
Every gate asks the same question: "Is the artifact for this phase complete, correct, and unambiguous enough for the next phase to proceed safely?"
Core Principle: The Gate Is the Quality Mechanism
In SDD, quality is not enforced by code review — that's too late. Quality is enforced by the phase gate. A defect caught at Gate 1 (spec review) costs minutes to fix. The same defect caught at Gate 4 (implementation review) costs hours — the implementation may need to be discarded and rewritten against a corrected spec.
This skill is deliberately strict. Its job is not to be agreeable; its job is to protect downstream phases from upstream artifacts that would waste their time.
Artifact-Pyramid Output: REVIEW.md
Phase-gate review reports follow the artifact-pyramid structure:
| Layer | Content | File |
|---|---|---|
| L1 | Gate decision — APPROVED / CONDITIONS / REJECTED, one-line rationale, blocking findings count | 00-index.md (entry point) |
| L2 | Review findings by category — spec completeness, task correctness, implementation compliance, verification gaps | Individual *.findings.md files |
| L3 | Per-finding dossiers — severity, location (artifact + section), recommendation, evidence, escalation path | dossiers/ directory |
| SOURCES | Cross-reference from each finding to the artifact section it evaluates | Footer of each file |
Loading Guidance
| Reference | When to load | File |
|---|---|---|
| Phase Gate Methodology | Before running any review — the four-gate structure, decision criteria, escalation paths | references/phase-gate-methodology.md |
| Spec Review Patterns | Reviewing a SPEC.md — completeness checks, ambiguity detection, testability assessment | references/spec-review-patterns.md |
| Implementation Review Patterns | Reviewing code against a spec — not general code review, but spec-compliance review | references/implementation-review-patterns.md |
| Acceptance Review Patterns | Reviewing verification results — assessing whether the verification report justifies a pass verdict | references/acceptance-review-patterns.md |
What ships with it
5 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.
- 11d ago First seen · 124 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A a77d58b3cf31
sdd-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository magnus919/hermes-profiles (169 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 1,485 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…
next-cache-components-optimizer
Drive a Next.js route to instant navigation by setting up an agentic loop, under Cache Components / PPR, on initial load (hard navigation) and client-side navigation (soft navigation). Encode the goal as a failing @next/playwright instant() e2e and work it to green, one verified route at a time; the shipped test then…
next-partial-prefetching-adoption
Turn on Partial Prefetching in a Next.js app and work through the insights it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable or adopt Partial Prefetching, flip the partialPrefetching flag, opt routes in with export const prefetch = 'partial', audit Link prefetch={true} behavior, preserve existing prefetched UI with…