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/moontzai/folderbridge-mcp/code-reviewnpx skills add MoonTzai/folderbridge-mcp --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MoonTzai/folderbridge-mcpWhat 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 | $0.00015 | $0.00240 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00120 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00048 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00024 |
Grade A, and why
code-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.
What it actually says
Code Review — FolderBridge Adaptation
Review a bounded diff from a fixed point and keep two questions independent:
- Standards — does the changed code fit the repository's documented conventions, architecture, safety rules, and high-signal maintainability expectations?
- Spec — does the implementation actually satisfy the originating request/design/spec, including negative requirements and promised behavior?
Establish the fixed point and read the relevant diff before judging. Read repository standards and the source spec where available; if one axis lacks evidence, say so instead of inventing requirements.
Report concrete findings with severity, affected location, evidence, consequence, and a focused remediation. Distinguish correctness/security defects from maintainability smells. Avoid style-only churn unless the repository explicitly requires it. Check for duplication, knowledge leaking across seams, speculative abstractions, message chains, feature envy, and changes that make one concept require edits in many distant modules.
Finish with the smallest set of findings that materially changes confidence in the implementation. A clean review means no supported finding remains, not that every file received a comment.
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 · 18 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 179c46cc85b0
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository MoonTzai/folderbridge-mcp (0 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 240 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
seller-research
Use when researching a merchant, storefront, marketplace seller, or merchant of record for a buying decision, especially when identity, refund terms, fulfillment, counterfeit risk, domain history, or independent buyer outcomes are uncertain.
product-research
Use when researching or comparing a specific product, model, or variant for a buying decision, especially when specifications conflict, fit or compatibility matters, retailer copy dominates, or the evidence may be incomplete.
codexless-release-supervisor
Prepare, validate, and publish Codexless preview/hotfix releases from the canonical household source, including acceptance anti-omission gates, candidate provenance/parity, manifest/build identity, native Windows/macOS fresh-install acceptance from clean public source, safe Git integration, GitHub prerelease…
codexless-browser-repair
Diagnose and temporarily repair Codexless Browser compatibility after a Codex, Chrome Skill, or Browser runtime update when Codexless Browser stopped working. Use for current-version Codexless Browser compatibility drift, not ordinary website bugs, general Browser operation, Codexless install/update work, or long-term…
codex-with-chatgpt
Use ChatGPT (web) as the planning and review brain for Codex coding sessions, while Codex keeps full execution ownership. Use when the user says "使用 Codex with ChatGPT ..." / "Set up Codex with ChatGPT" / "用 ChatGPT 规划", when they ask to connect ChatGPT to the current workspace, disconnect it, or run a task through…
add-widget
Add a new widget (React UI + MCP tool) to this template. Use when asked to "add a widget", "add a new tool with UI", "create a new widget", "scaffold a widget", or "build a new MCP App feature".