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/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup/reviewnpx skills add michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setupWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.03589 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01795 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00718 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00359 |
Grade A, and why
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 yesterday.
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 — 307 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/review
Run the full review panel — test-specialist, security-auditor, code-reviewer, code-simplifier, and architecture-reviewer — in parallel against the current uncommitted working tree, then return one consolidated verdict.
Use this as a pre-commit gate, after exploratory work outside /work, or any time you want a comprehensive review of "what's on disk right now."
Usage
/review
No arguments. The skill always operates on the current working tree (staged + unstaged + untracked).
Scope
"Uncommitted changes" means everything that differs from HEAD:
- Tracked changes —
git diff HEAD --name-only(covers both staged and unstaged) - Untracked files — entries from
git status --porcelainwhose status code is??
If both lists are empty, exit immediately with "Nothing to review — working tree matches HEAD." Do not launch any agents.
Constraints
/reviewdoes not modify production code. The four reviewers (security-auditor,code-reviewer,code-simplifier,architecture-reviewer) are read-only.test-specialistis the one carve-out: it may add new test files and fix failures introduced by its own new tests — but never bootstrap test infra, modify unrelated tests, or touch non-test source. The user decides what to do with the verdict.- If an agent errors out (timeout, missing definition, runtime failure, or returns an unparseable response the synthesizer can't extract a verdict and findings from), mark it
UNAVAILABLEwith a one-line reason in the per-agent results, do not retry, and compute the overall verdict from the remaining agents.
Why test-specialist is allowed to write (but not bootstrap): the goal of
/reviewis comprehensive pre-commit confidence, and "no test exists for the new code" is a gap the panel should close, not just report. Bootstrapping a test framework, in contrast, is a structural project decision (framework choice, layout, scripts) that belongs in/work, not as a side effect of a review pass. New test files are flagged under "Per-agent results" so the user knows they weren't themselves reviewed in this pass — they'll be on the next/reviewrun.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 307 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 0b58ce33a99d
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 3,589 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
babysit-pr
Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep…
imagegen
Generate or edit raster images when the task benefits from AI-created bitmap visuals such as photos, illustrations, textures, sprites, mockups, or transparent-background cutouts. Use when Codex should create a brand-new image, transform an existing image, or derive visual variants from references, and the output…