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 agentmods add skills/marcusjellinghaus/mcp-tools-py/implementation_reviewnpx skills add MarcusJellinghaus/mcp-tools-py --skill implementation_reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MarcusJellinghaus/mcp-tools-pyWrote 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/marcusjellinghaus/mcp-tools-py/implementation_review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marcusjellinghaus/mcp-tools-py/implementation_review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marcusjellinghaus/mcp-tools-py/implementation_review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00008 | $0.00355 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00178 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00071 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00036 |
Grade A, and why
implementation_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 2d 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.
This is a copy
97% identical to implementation_review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Implementation Review (Code Review)
First, ensure we're up to date:
Call mcp__mcp-workspace__git with command "fetch" and args ["origin"].
Use mcp__mcp-workspace__git with command "status" to check working directory state.
Call mcp__mcp-workspace__check_branch_status.
Confirm and display the current feature branch name.
Then run the code review:
Code Review Request
Use mcp__mcp-workspace__git with command "diff" to get the changes to review.
No need to run all checks; do not use pylint warnings. Feel free to further analyse any mentioned files and/or the file structure.
Focus Areas:
- Logic errors or bugs
- Tests for
__main__functions should be removed (not needed) - Unnecessary debug code or print statements
- Code that could break existing functionality
- Compliance with existing architecture principles, see
docs/architecture/architecture.md
Output Format:
- Summary - What changed (1-2 sentences)
- Critical Issues - Must fix before merging
- Suggestions - Nice to have improvements
- Good - What works well
Do not perform any action. Just present the code review.
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.
- 2d ago Changed · -1 lines 734fe923c034
- 6d ago First seen · 45 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A 68d41edcbc8c
implementation_review is a skill published in the GitHub repository MarcusJellinghaus/mcp-tools-py (18 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 355 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to implementation_review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
test-quality
Test quality bar for this repo. Read when writing, reviewing, or designing tests — covers naming, abstraction level, assertions, determinism, and the process for agent-driven test work.
idapython
IDA Pro Python scripting for reverse engineering. Use when writing IDAPython scripts, analyzing binaries, working with IDA's API for disassembly, decompilation (Hex-Rays), type systems, cross-references, functions, segments, or any IDA database manipulation. Covers ida modules (50+), idautils iterators, and common…
vibeue
Unreal Engine 5 development using the VibeUE Python API. Use when working in Unreal Engine — blueprints, state trees, materials, actors, landscapes, animation, niagara, widgets, sound, foliage, gameplay tags, enhanced input, skeletons, PCG (procedural content generation), and more. VibeUE is an extension of Unreal's…
test-generator
Generate pytest test cases for Python functions and classes.
n8n-code-python
Write Python code in n8n Code nodes. Use when writing Python in n8n, using input/json/node syntax, working with standard library, or need to understand Python limitations in n8n Code nodes. Use this skill when the user specifically requests Python for an n8n Code node. Note — JavaScript is recommended for 95% of use…
touchdesigner-self-debug
A generic workflow for self-starting TouchDesigner via computer-use (or an already-running instance), loading mcpwebserverbase.tox, and verifying any TD-side Python change (td/modules/) directly from the Textport — reading back real TD runtime values and reconciling them. Use after changing TD-side code in the…