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 mikeparcewski/wicked-garden --skill review-methodologygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mikeparcewski/wicked-gardenWrote 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/mikeparcewski/wicked-garden/review-methodology)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mikeparcewski/wicked-garden/review-methodology"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mikeparcewski/wicked-garden/review-methodology/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/mikeparcewski/wicked-garden/review-methodology"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mikeparcewski/wicked-garden/review-methodology.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, 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 Excessive Agency · line 115 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00095 | $0.01254 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00048 | $0.00627 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00251 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00125 |
Grade A, and why
wicked-garden-agentic-review-methodology 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 — 187 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agentic Review Methodology
Systematic approach to reviewing agentic systems and codebases for issues, risks, and improvement opportunities.
Four-Phase Review Process
Phase 1: Detect (Discovery)
Goal: Identify all potential issues
Activities:
- Code analysis (static analysis, anti-patterns)
- Configuration review (prompts, secrets, limits)
- Runtime analysis (logs, traces, metrics)
- Documentation review
Tools:
- Static analyzers (pylint, mypy, eslint)
- Custom grep patterns for agentic anti-patterns
- Log aggregation tools
Deliverable: Raw issue inventory
Phase 2: Analyze (Assessment)
Goal: Understand each issue's impact and root cause
For Each Issue:
- Classify type (see
refs/issue-taxonomy-reliability-safety.mdandrefs/issue-taxonomy-quality-testing.md) - Determine severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low)
- Assess impact (Reliability/Security/Cost/Performance)
- Identify root cause
- Estimate fix effort
Analysis Framework:
- What is the issue?
- Why is it a problem?
- What are the consequences?
- What is the root cause?
- How should it be fixed?
Deliverable: Analyzed issue list with severity and impact
Phase 3: Score (Prioritization)
Goal: Prioritize issues for remediation
Severity Levels:
Critical (P0): Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, system crashes, compliance violations. Fix immediately.
High (P1): Reliability issues, performance problems, cost inefficiencies, safety gaps. Fix within 1 week.
Medium (P2): Code quality issues, minor performance issues, missing observability. Fix within 1 month.
Low (P3): Style issues, optimization opportunities, nice-to-have features. Backlog.
Prioritization Matrix:
Impact vs Effort:
Low Effort High Effort
High Quick Wins Major Projects
Impact (Do First) (Plan)
Low Easy Wins Avoid
Impact (Do Later) (Skip)
Deliverable: Prioritized roadmap
Phase 4: Report (Communication)
What ships with it
3 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 · 187 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A f919bcca9c72
wicked-garden-agentic-review-methodology is a skill published in the GitHub repository mikeparcewski/wicked-garden (9 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 95 tokens to every session and 1,254 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…