Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Nam-Cheol/namba-ai. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Nam-Cheol/namba-ai/main/.agents/skills/namba-pr/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Nam-Cheol/namba-aiWrote 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/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-pr/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/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nam-cheol/namba-ai/namba-pr.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00650 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00325 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00130 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
namba-pr 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.
What it actually says
State effect: mutating workflow entry point. Use help/probe paths read-only, and otherwise expect repository state or GitHub state to change.
Generated instruction contract for this command skill:
- Purpose: keep the role or command scope explicit, bounded, and testable.
- Boundary: honor read-only versus mutating state effects, configured sandbox mode, and assigned file or workflow ownership.
- Required output: report concrete actions, changed paths or artifacts, validation evidence, and pass/fail status or blockers.
- Pass/fail criteria: claim success only when acceptance criteria and configured validation are satisfied; otherwise name the exact blocker and impact.
- Evidence expectations: cite source artifacts such as SPEC files,
.namba/configs, diffs, test output, PR/check links, or generated manifests instead of relying on unsupported assertions. - Security responsibilities: never expose or commit secrets; treat auth, privacy, destructive commands, permission changes, and external network or credential use as security-sensitive.
- Destructive command and escalation policy: do not run destructive commands unless explicitly requested; request approval for privileged, networked, or sandbox-blocked actions only when the active approval mode allows it, and otherwise report the blocker or use a safe non-escalating path.
- Fallback implementer boundary: if a specialist path is unavailable and the main/default implementer takes over, stay within the assigned scope and preserve the same evidence and validation duties.
- Portability: keep durable guidance non-project-specific unless the current repository config or SPEC explicitly provides the project detail.
Use this skill when the user explicitly says $namba-pr, namba pr, or asks to hand off the current branch for review.
Behavior:
- Use the configured PR base branch, PR language, and Codex review command from
.namba/config/sections/git-strategy.yaml; let an explicit--language <en|ko|ja|zh>request override the configured PR language for that handoff. - Run
namba syncand validation by default before creating review artifacts. - Build the PR body from concrete completed work, changed areas or files, evidence sources, validation results, and the latest SPEC review-readiness artifact when
.namba/specs/<SPEC>/reviews/readiness.mdexists. - PR bodies must avoid empty placeholder prose; cite source artifacts such as
.namba/project/change-summary.md,.namba/project/pr-checklist.md, SPEC files, validation output, commits, or PR metadata when available. - Inspect current PR check status before review handoff; for failing GitHub Actions checks, capture run URLs and bounded GitHub Actions failure snippets, and report external checks by status and details URL only.
- Commit and push the current work branch, create or reuse the GitHub PR, and do not request Codex review unless the user explicitly asked for
--review. - When
--reviewis present, ensure the configured Codex review marker exists exactly once. - Collaboration defaults: PRs target
main, PR content is written in Korean, and@codex reviewis the explicit review request command.
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 · 30 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 16261f98c4fa
namba-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository Nam-Cheol/namba-ai (11 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 650 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
triage
Gatekeep and review GitHub issues and pull requests for Qwen Code maintainers. Use for GitHub Action issue triage, PR admission checks, product-direction review, KISS-focused PR review, and staged bilingual GitHub comments.
armada-pr
PR-first finish for a feature lane. Use before reporting a feature done. Triggers on: PR, finish feature, gh pr create, merge, lane complete.
distilling-prs
Use when triaging, categorizing, or summarizing PR changes to decide where human attention should go. Triggers: 'summarize this PR', 'what changed in PR #X', 'triage PR', 'which files need review', 'PR overview', 'categorize changes', or pasting a PR URL. NOT for: judging code quality or producing findings on a branch…
reviewing-prs
Load before dispatching any subagent to review or triage a pull request, to pick the correct file version for the branch and worktree state. Required by: advanced-code-review (PR mode), code-review (--pr), distilling-prs (Phase 2), each of which names this skill at its dispatch point. Also use directly when: 'review…
requesting-code-review
Use when implementation is done and you need a structured pre-PR review workflow. Triggers: 'ready for review', 'review my changes before PR', 'pre-merge check', 'is this ready', 'submit for review'. NOT for: post-merge review (use code-review) or deciding how to integrate (use finishing-a-development-branch).
pair-review
Standalone cross-review of current git changes with a fresh read-only reviewer, optionally adding Codex's native review. ONLY runs when the user explicitly types /pair-review. NEVER activate automatically.