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 no-human-ai/no_human --skill review-this-branchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/no-human-ai/no_humanWrote 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/no-human-ai/no_human/review-this-branch)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/no-human-ai/no_human/review-this-branch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/no-human-ai/no_human/review-this-branch/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/no-human-ai/no_human/review-this-branch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/no-human-ai/no_human/review-this-branch.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 | $0.00053 | $0.01404 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00562 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00281 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00140 |
Grade A, and why
review-this-branch 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 8d 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 — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review this branch
Run nh gate to get a fresh-session, adversarial code review and a
test-tampering check over a diff, right now, with nothing installed or
running beyond the nh CLI itself.
When to use
- Someone asks "review this branch" / "check this PR" / "is this safe to merge" and wants a real second-model review with file:line citations, not a summary you write yourself.
- There is no no_human server running and no
~/.no_humandatabase set up. Unlikefile-a-task, this skill needs neither. It runs once and exits.
Prerequisite: your own Claude credential
nh gate uses your own Claude credential, the same one every other nh
command uses, never one belonging to no_human itself. If none is on file,
create it with:
claude setup-token
nh gate also needs the nh CLI on PATH and a claude CLI it can find:
the one bundled inside the installed SDK package is used first, so a separate
install on PATH is not required. If either precondition is missing, the
command refuses and names exactly what is missing. It never prints a pass when it could not actually run.
Running it
Two invocations, both read-only:
nh gate # current branch vs. its merge base with origin's default branch
nh gate --pr <github-pr-url> # a GitHub pull request's head vs. its merge base
Optional flags: --repo <path> to point at a checkout other than the
current directory, --base <ref> to override the comparison base.
The comparison actually used, for example working tree branch ... against merge base with origin/<default> or pull request owner/repo#N head ... against merge base with origin/<default>, is always printed at the top of
the output. If the working tree has uncommitted changes, the output says so
explicitly and those files are not reviewed; commit them first if they
should be.
Reading the result: the exit-code contract
| Exit code | Meaning |
|---|---|
0 |
Gate passed: reviewer found no blocking findings and the tamper guard found no test-weakening. |
1 |
Gate failed: a blocking review finding or a tamper-guard finding (deleted/weakened tests). |
2 |
Gate refused to run: no review verdict was reached at all. A named precondition failed: no credential, no upstream, not a git repo, PR fetch failed, the diff is over the single-turn review cap, or the reviewer timed out / hit a transport error. |
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 114 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A e5597cfb276a
review-this-branch is a skill published in the GitHub repository no-human-ai/no_human (320 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 1,404 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-17.
Other skills, from other repositories
gh-address-comments
Help address review/issue comments on the open GitHub PR for the current branch using gh CLI; verify gh auth first and prompt the user to authenticate if not logged in.
resolve-drive-pr
Drive an open PR through current CI, independent Polly review, preview, and maintainer handoff.
gentle-ai-collab-perfect
Trigger: contributing to Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai as an external collaborator. Strict issue-first workflow, honest PR bodies, contributor-vs-maintainer scope, chained-PR strategy, verification protocol, docstring coverage. Load whenever the active repo is Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai and any part of the…
branch-pr
Create Gentle AI pull requests with issue-first checks. Trigger: creating, opening, or preparing PRs for review.
work-unit-commits
Plan commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.
chained-pr
Trigger: PRs over 400 lines, stacked PRs, review slices. Split oversized changes into chained PRs that protect review focus.