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 MoonTzai/folderbridge-mcp --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MoonTzai/folderbridge-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/moontzai/folderbridge-mcp/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/moontzai/folderbridge-mcp/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/moontzai/folderbridge-mcp/code-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/moontzai/folderbridge-mcp/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/moontzai/folderbridge-mcp/code-review.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 | $0.00015 | $0.00240 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00096 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $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 1mo 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.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 18 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 179c46cc85b0
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository MoonTzai/folderbridge-mcp (2 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 240 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
style-guide
Dedalus style guide quick reference. Key rules for writing code that lasts. Use when writing or reviewing Python code.
second-opinion
Get an independent review of the current change from a different model family (GPT via Codex, Copilot or Cursor; Gemini via Antigravity) through agent-intern, then check each finding against the code and reconcile it with your own view. Use before merging a risky diff, when stuck on a bug, or when the user asks for a…
erga-mcp
Use immediately when a user shares a job-posting URL—including a bare link or chat preview—and when organizing recruiting records, evaluating career evidence, or proposing a truthful résumé update through Erga MCP.
knowledge-audit
Review and clean up stored memories — find duplicates, contradictions, stale entries, and consolidate.
web-design-guidelines
Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
mem0-vercel-ai-sdk
Mem0 provider for Vercel AI SDK (@mem0/vercel-ai-provider). TRIGGER when: user mentions "vercel ai sdk", "@mem0/vercel-ai-provider", "createMem0", "retrieveMemories", "addMemories", "getMemories", "searchMemories", "mem0 vercel", "AI SDK provider", "AI SDK memory", or is using generateText/streamText with mem0. Also…