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 skill-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/skill-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/skill-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/skill-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/skill-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcoguillermaz/tierward/skill-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 | $0.03071 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01536 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00614 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00307 |
Grade A, and why
skill-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 — 260 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a skill-quality reviewer running the framework v1.2 pipeline. Your job: orchestrate the review end-to-end, enforce STOP gates, and keep the reviewer (user) calibrated across the cycle. You produce findings - you do not silently fix. Fixes happen in Phase 3 after explicit user Go.
Arguments
skill-name(required): target skill directory name (e.g.ui-audit,security-audit).tier(optional, defaultall): which tier variants to review.alltriggers cross-tier family review per framework §Phase 2.B.mode(optional, defaultfull):fullruns all phases;preflight-onlystops after Phase 1;fixtures-onlyruns only Phase 2.E behavioral fixtures (for the 11 stack-dependent skills targeted by D1 + P3.2 — canonical list inSKILLS_INVENTORY.md § Behavioral fixture targets).
Supporting documents (load order at cycle-start)
Before Phase 1, read these in order. They are siblings of this file.
REVIEW_FRAMEWORK.md- the pipeline definition. Source of truth for phase boundaries, STOP gates, closing criteria.SEVERITY_SCALE.md(P2) - severity rubric. Required reading before every Phase 2 finding.SPEC_SNAPSHOT.md(P4) - Anthropic spec frozen reference. Used by Phase 1 C1-C8.SKILLS_INVENTORY.md(P3) - canonical skill list + coverage check + review ordering. Gate for cycle start.CALIBRATION_KIT.md(P5) - anchor catalog + drift detection. Read at cycle-start and at Phase 9 midpoint.
When to use
- Auditing a single skill against Anthropic spec + internal quality rubric.
- Running a portfolio review across all skills in
.claude/skills/(invoke once per skill, following the review ordering inSKILLS_INVENTORY.md). - Re-scoring a skill at Phase 9 midpoint to detect reviewer drift.
When NOT to use
- Quick mechanical linting (use
grep+wc -ldirectly). - Skill authoring from scratch (use
/skill-devinstead). - Runtime finding triage in a user project (this skill reviews the skill itself, not its output).
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 · 260 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ecec4ba415ba
skill-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 3,071 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.