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 marcoguillermaz/Tierward --skill pr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/marcoguillermaz/TierwardWrote 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/marcoguillermaz/tierward/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/pr-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/marcoguillermaz/tierward/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/pr-review.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 | $0.00000 | $0.05369 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.02684 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00537 |
Grade A, and why
pr-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 356 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Run an autonomous PR review locally. Classify findings by severity, post the review as a comment for audit trail, and surface a merge decision to the user. Read-only: the skill orchestrates a review; it does not modify code, does not push, does not merge.
Step 0 — Resolve repo + parse args
# Detect the GitHub repo from the local clone (no hard-coded org/repo).
REPO=$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner)
If gh repo view fails: respond "This skill requires the gh CLI authenticated against a GitHub repo. Run \gh auth login` and ensure the project has a GitHub remote."` and stop.
Parse $ARGUMENTS:
| Arg | Behavior |
|---|---|
<PR_NUMBER> (positional, optional) |
Integer. If absent, detect from current branch in Step 1. |
--local |
Review the local working diff (git diff <base>...HEAD) instead of a PR. Use before the PR exists to catch findings pre-push. Auto-selected in Step 1 when no PR is found for the branch, so an explicit flag is only needed to force local mode while an open PR also exists. |
--base <branch> |
Base branch for --local diff (default: the repo's default branch, resolved in Step 1). Ignored in PR mode (the PR carries its own base). |
--deep |
Escalate the review subagent from sonnet to opus. Use for changes touching auth, money, migrations, or shared utilities. Adds ~30-60s latency. |
--with-context |
Pass the active session file (.claude/session/block-*.md if present) to the review subagent. Default OFF — review stays diff-pure and unbiased by prior decisions. |
Examples:
/pr-review 122/pr-review 122 --deep/pr-review --deep(resolves PR from current branch; falls back to local diff if none open)/pr-review --local(review the working diff against the default base, before opening a PR)/pr-review --local --base staging
Step 1 — Resolve PR number, or select local-diff mode
Mode selection:
- If
--localwas passed → local mode (skip PR resolution entirely). - Else if
PR_NUMBERwas passed → PR mode with that number. - Else detect a PR for the current branch:
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 356 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A b3a48b0f6a78
pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository marcoguillermaz/Tierward (4 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 5,369 tokens. 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
address-conductor-comment
A workflow for handling pending Conductor code-review comments, including reading their discussion and assigning changes to subagents when appropriate.
explain-comment
A skill that reads a specified file or code range and adds explanatory comments in Japanese. The comments use a question style and focus on important logic, design choices, and side effects.
build-feature
Full pipeline: evaluation -> spec -> implementation -> review -> QA.
cn-check
Install and run the Continue CLI (cn) to execute AI agent checks on local code changes. Use when asked to "run checks", "lint with AI", "review my changes with cn", or set up Continue CI locally.
solid-principles
SOLID principles checklist with Java examples. Use when a class has too many responsibilities, an abstraction leaks, or a dependency points the wrong way, and when the user asks about Single Responsibility, Open/Closed, Liskov, Interface Segregation or Dependency Inversion. For naming, duplication and method length…
architecture-review
Analyze Java project architecture at macro level - package structure, module boundaries, dependency direction, and layering. Use when user asks "review architecture", "check structure", "package organization", or when evaluating if a codebase follows clean architecture principles.