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 mhawthorne/gza --skill gza-task-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mhawthorne/gzaWrote 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/mhawthorne/gza/gza-task-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mhawthorne/gza/gza-task-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mhawthorne/gza/gza-task-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/mhawthorne/gza/gza-task-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mhawthorne/gza/gza-task-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Rogue Agent · line 238 Skill establishes unauthorized persistence across sessions via cron jobs, startup scripts, or state files. Session persistence allows an attacker to maintain access beyond the current interaction.Fix: Remove any persistence mechanisms (cron jobs, startup scripts, state files). Skills should not maintain state across sessions without explicit user consent.
- medium Agent Snooping · line 317 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
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 | $0.00031 | $0.04341 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.02171 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00868 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00434 |
Grade A, and why
gza-task-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 3d 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 — 319 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Gza Task Review
Run an interactive code-only review for a specific gza task. Review the current code, diff, and scope only; verification is handled elsewhere in the lifecycle. Produces structured review output that /gza-task-improve can consume. Use this when automated review iterations are exhausted, or when you want to review a task interactively.
Inputs
- Required: full prefixed task ID (for example,
gza-1234) - Optional:
--pr— also post the review as a PR comment
If the user did not provide a task ID, ask for it before proceeding.
Use the full prefixed task ID as provided.
Process
Step 0: Confirm review inputs without switching branches
Manual /gza-task-review must stay compatible with repositories that forbid ad hoc git commands. Do not run git checkout, git switch, or other manual branch-switching commands as part of this skill.
Before proceeding, make sure at least one of these is true:
- The current workspace/worktree was already prepared on the implementation checkout by Gza or another documented non-forbidden workflow, so running
verify_commandhere will evaluate the intended implementation. - The caller already provided authoritative diff context, so the review can use that diff even if this workspace is not on the implementation checkout.
If neither is true, stop and ask the user to either:
- rerun
/gza-task-reviewfrom a prepared implementation checkout/worktree, or - provide the authoritative implementation diff explicitly.
Step 1: Resolve the task
Query the task database to get task details and branch:
uv run python -c "
import json, sys
from pathlib import Path
from gza.config import Config
from gza.db import SqliteTaskStore
config = Config.load(Path.cwd())
store = SqliteTaskStore.from_config(config)
task = store.get(<TASK_ID>)
if not task:
print('ERROR: Task not found', file=sys.stderr)
sys.exit(1)
# If given a review or improve task, resolve to the implementation task
impl_task = task
if task.task_type == 'review' and task.depends_on:
impl_task = store.get(task.depends_on)
elif task.task_type == 'improve' and task.based_on:
impl_task = store.get(task.based_on)
# Check for existing reviews
assert impl_task.id is not None
reviews = store.get_reviews_for_task(impl_task.id)
latest_review = reviews[0] if reviews else None
print(json.dumps({
'impl_task_id': impl_task.id,
'impl_task_type': impl_task.task_type,
'impl_branch': impl_task.branch,
'impl_prompt': impl_task.prompt,
'impl_status': impl_task.status,
'impl_tags': list(impl_task.tags),
'has_existing_review': latest_review is not None,
'existing_review_id': latest_review.id if latest_review else None,
'verify_command': config.verify_command,
}, default=str))
"
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.
- 3d ago Changed · +1 lines 45aa949ecbc3
- 8d ago Changed · +7 lines d560f7a9ac2c
- 12d ago First seen · 311 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A ee0ca93eae47
gza-task-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository mhawthorne/gza (12 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 4,341 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
verify-change
A change-checking skill that reviews code differences and checks whether related documentation, tests, and records were updated.
verify-module
A module-checking skill that scans a project’s folders, code, and documentation. It expects each module to include a README.md and DESIGN.md, which explain how the module is used and why it was designed that way.
verify-quality
A code-quality checker that measures complexity, size, naming, and common code smells. It reports problems such as duplicated code, unused code, and overly long functions.
criticism-self-criticism
A structured review method for examining completed work, criticism, and repeated mistakes. It focuses on specific evidence, causes, effects, and practical improvements.
planning
ONLY for coordinated multi-artifact work: multiple workflows with dependencies, shared data-table schema/migration across tasks, or the user explicitly asked to review a plan first. Load create-tasks via loadtool before calling it (search "create tasks" if not visible). Do NOT use for new one-off workflows…
flow-next-impl-review
Carmack-level implementation review of changes via the configured backend. Use when asked to review code or a diff in a flow-next repo.