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 Maximumsoft-Co-LTD/claude-flightdeck --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Maximumsoft-Co-LTD/claude-flightdeckWrote 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/maximumsoft-co-ltd/claude-flightdeck/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/maximumsoft-co-ltd/claude-flightdeck/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/maximumsoft-co-ltd/claude-flightdeck/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 | $0.00245 | $0.03013 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00122 | $0.01507 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00049 | $0.00603 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00301 |
Grade A, and why
review scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 6d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
> Structure-only / curl / unit-test-only verdicts are forbidden. How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 212 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/review — Unified Review Gate
Announce: open your reply with "Using /review [mode] …".
Token budget
- Diff-first always.
git diff --statthen targetedgit diff <files>— never the whole repo. Screenshot routes lazily (only when you reach a route). - Reviewer subagents get the diff + spec, not the whole repo. Capture smoke output verbatim; re-Read only the failing tail. Don't re-Read root CLAUDE.md.
Mode dispatch
/review → AUTO-SELECT (§1)
/review design → 3-lens visual-fidelity gate (§2)
/review security → semantic security pass (§3)
/review gates <ID> → 6-gate post-delegation review (§4)
/review ultra [<base>]→ Workflow-backed adversarial review, large diffs (§5)
§1 — AUTO-SELECT
Scope the diff, then fire the matching lens(es). State which triggered and why; if none trigger, say so and stop — do NOT manufacture findings.
git diff --stat <integration-base>...HEAD
git diff <integration-base>...HEAD
- Phase 9 → design lens (§2): diff touches UI component / page / layout; design tokens / theme / CSS variables; i18n catalogs; responsive breakpoints; animations / motion; focus / hover / a11y-visible styling.
- Phase 7 → security lens (§3): auth / session / token; password / credential;
crypto; SQL / query building; HTML rendering of untrusted input; file-path /
archive extraction; shell / subprocess spawning; deserialization; secret files;
new external endpoints; SSRF; XXE; prototype pollution; CORS / CSP / cookies;
regex from user input (ReDoS); committed agent-config (
.claude/settings*.json,.mcp.json,.claude/hooks/*,ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL); any new dependency in a manifest. - Neither → quality lens: run the Gate 4b reviewers on the diff (see §4).
Canonical trigger definitions: ../../rules/phase-matrix.md.
Multiple triggers → run multiple lenses (design → security → quality).
§2 — DESIGN lens (/review design)
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 212 lines · 245 tokens per session scan A cd909e8da1f1
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Maximumsoft-Co-LTD/claude-flightdeck (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 245 tokens to every session and 3,013 once invoked, about $0.0012 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
audit-agents-skills
Audit Claude Code agents, skills, and commands for quality and production readiness. Use when evaluating skill quality, checking production readiness scores, or comparing agents against best-practice templates.
pr-triage
4-phase PR backlog management with audit, deep code review, validated comments, and optional worktree setup. Use when triaging pull requests, catching up on pending code reviews, or managing a backlog of open PRs. Args: 'all' to review all, PR numbers to focus (e.g. '42 57'), 'en'/'fr' for language, no arg = audit…
review-pr
Perform a comprehensive code review of a pull request.
validate-changes
Evaluate staged changes using LLM-as-a-Judge before committing.
dos-verify-done-claims
Before accepting an agent's 'done / shipped / fixed' claim, verify it against ground truth (git ancestry + the commit's own diff) using the DOS kernel's dos verify and dos commit-audit — never the agent's own narration.
tearitapart
Critical pre-implementation review. Find what AI breaks. Verdict: PROCEED, REVISE, or RETHINK. Triggers: review plan, tear apart, critique, analyze.