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 mmornati/leanproxy-mcp --skill bmad-editorial-review-structuregit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mmornati/leanproxy-mcpWrote 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/mmornati/leanproxy-mcp/bmad-editorial-review-structure)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mmornati/leanproxy-mcp/bmad-editorial-review-structure"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mmornati/leanproxy-mcp/bmad-editorial-review-structure/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/mmornati/leanproxy-mcp/bmad-editorial-review-structure"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mmornati/leanproxy-mcp/bmad-editorial-review-structure.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00035 | $0.02296 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.01148 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00459 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00230 |
Grade A, and why
bmad-editorial-review-structure 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 10d 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
100% identical to bmad-editorial-review-structure — 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 180 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Editorial Review - Structure
Goal: Review document structure and propose substantive changes to improve clarity and flow -- run this BEFORE copy editing.
Your Role: You are a structural editor focused on HIGH-VALUE DENSITY. Brevity IS clarity: concise writing respects limited attention spans and enables effective scanning. Every section must justify its existence -- cut anything that delays understanding. True redundancy is failure. Follow ALL steps in the STEPS section IN EXACT ORDER. DO NOT skip steps or change the sequence. HALT immediately when halt-conditions are met. Each action within a step is a REQUIRED action to complete that step.
STYLE GUIDE OVERRIDE: If a style_guide input is provided, it overrides ALL generic principles in this task (including human-reader-principles, llm-reader-principles, reader_type-specific priorities, structure-models selection, and the Microsoft Writing Style Guide baseline). The ONLY exception is CONTENT IS SACROSANCT -- never change what ideas say, only how they're expressed. When style guide conflicts with this task, style guide wins.
Inputs:
- content (required) -- Document to review (markdown, plain text, or structured content)
- style_guide (optional) -- Project-specific style guide. When provided, overrides all generic principles in this task (except CONTENT IS SACROSANCT). The style guide is the final authority on tone, structure, and language choices.
- purpose (optional) -- Document's intended purpose (e.g., 'quickstart tutorial', 'API reference', 'conceptual overview')
- target_audience (optional) -- Who reads this? (e.g., 'new users', 'experienced developers', 'decision makers')
- reader_type (optional, default: "humans") -- 'humans' (default) preserves comprehension aids; 'llm' optimizes for precision and density
- length_target (optional) -- Target reduction (e.g., '30% shorter', 'half the length', 'no limit')
Principles
- Comprehension through calibration: Optimize for the minimum words needed to maintain understanding
- Front-load value: Critical information comes first; nice-to-know comes last (or goes)
- One source of truth: If information appears identically twice, consolidate
- Scope discipline: Content that belongs in a different document should be cut or linked
- Propose, don't execute: Output recommendations -- user decides what to accept
- CONTENT IS SACROSANCT: Never challenge ideas -- only optimize how they're organized.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 180 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 164444359d74
bmad-editorial-review-structure is a skill published in the GitHub repository mmornati/leanproxy-mcp (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 2,296 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to bmad-editorial-review-structure, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
gemtracker
Analyze Ruby gem dependencies, vulnerabilities, outdated packages, maintenance health, and insecure gem sources with the gemtracker CLI. Use when asked to audit Ruby gems, check Gemfile.lock security, review dependency health, or run gemtracker.
cn-check
Install and run the Continue CLI (cn) to execute AI agent checks on local code changes. Use when asked to "run checks", "lint with AI", "review my changes with cn", or set up Continue CI locally.
printing-press-output-review
Internal sub-skill: agentic review of a printed CLI's sampled command output for plausibility issues that rule-based checks can't encode (substring-match relevance, format bugs, silent source drops, ranking failures). Invoked via the Skill tool by the main printing-press skill at Phase 4.85 and printing-press-polish…
use-modern-go
Use the Modern Go Guidelines CLI whenever writing, modifying, fixing, or refactoring Go code. Apply its version-specific guidance to generated changes.
gograph
Go repository intelligence for Claude Code. Use when reading, navigating, editing, reviewing, or refactoring a Go codebase. Exposes 64 query, analysis, and workflow capabilities through the local gograph MCP server, including bounded first-call exploration, AST-aware call graphs, blast-radius analysis, impact, and…
skill-creator
Create, edit, improve, or audit AgentSkills. Use when creating a new skill from scratch or when asked to improve, review, audit, tidy up, or clean up an existing skill or SKILL.md file. Also use when editing or restructuring a skill directory.