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 onlygian/G-Forge --skill g-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/onlygian/G-ForgeWrote 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/onlygian/g-forge/g-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/onlygian/g-forge/g-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/onlygian/g-forge/g-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/onlygian/g-forge/g-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/onlygian/g-forge/g-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 | $0.00046 | $0.03820 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01528 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00764 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00382 |
Grade A, and why
g-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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed GPL-3.0
The repository is licensed GPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
What ships with it
8 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- references/attestation-doctrine.md 2.0 KB
- references/fix-closure-sweep.md 2.6 KB
- references/milestone-close.md 5.5 KB
- references/panel-history.md 2.1 KB
- references/review-holds-history.md 1.4 KB
- references/round-consolidation.md 2.0 KB
- references/sentinel-binding.md 2.6 KB
- scripts/build-review-pack.sh 16 KB runs code
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 · 107 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A d6d4874af51b
g-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository onlygian/G-Forge (4 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed GPL-3.0. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 3,820 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
hermit-scribe
File a GitHub issue or post a comment on an existing issue via a GitHub App bot identity. Use when the operator says "file as a GH issue", "open an issue for PROP-NNN", "report this to the tracker", "add a comment to issue.
proof-e2e
Build E2E test specs for critical user journeys — Playwright or Cypress, page objects, setup/teardown, CI config. Use when asked to "write E2E tests", "end-to-end testing", "browser tests", "UI tests", or "Playwright tests".
apex-review
Cross-cutting review of recent work — catches gaps between specialists. Use when asked to "review what we built", "check the work", "pre-launch review", or after completing a significant chunk of work.
proof-strategy
Produce a test strategy for a project or feature — risk map, test type decisions, coverage targets, CI config. Use when asked to "create test strategy", "what should we test", "testing plan", or "improve test coverage".
spine-review
API and backend code review — REST conventions, auth, validation, error handling, pagination, rate limiting, test coverage. Use when asked to "review this API", "code review", "review backend", or "pre-launch backend check".
repo-hardening
Audit a repository the way a rigorous engineer would and produce an evidence-backed, prioritized improvement plan covering instruction files, lint and source gates, type strictness, test quality, CI and merge flow, review and verification habits, and the mistake classes agents keep repeating in git history. Use when…