Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment. 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/open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment/main/.agents/skills/review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignmentWrote 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/open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment/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/open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment/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 | $0.00035 | $0.02939 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.01470 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00588 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00294 |
Grade A, and why
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 12d 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 — 407 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/review
A second opinion before committing. Review checks alignment between intent and execution, detects drift, and decides: continue, adjust, or salvage.
This is part of the Intent > Execution > Review loop that runs at every scale--from a single commit to a multi-week project. Review closes the loop.
The same skill also provides an independent review mode for /ship. A fresh, separate sub-agent returns an explicit APPROVE or REQUEST CHANGES; when invoked for the final-diff gate, it reviews the exact commit proposed for merge.
When to Use
Invoke /review when:
- Before committing - natural checkpoint before code hits the branch
- At natural pause points - end of a work session, end of a subtask
- Something feels off - you've been coding a while and lost track of where you are
- Scope seems to have grown - the task feels bigger than when you started
- Before PRs - final check before requesting review from humans
Do not use when: You're in deep flow and making progress. Don't interrupt productive work. Review at natural breaks, not arbitrary intervals.
Independent Review Mode
Use this mode only when invoked by /ship as a fresh, separate reviewer sub-agent. Step 2 uses it for early adversarial feedback; step 10c invokes a different fresh reviewer for the binding final-diff gate.
Isolation contract
- The reviewer must be a distinct sub-agent, not the implementer and not a reused earlier reviewer.
- Start with fresh context.
- Inputs are limited to:
- the exact final diff and reviewed commit SHA;
- the linked issue acceptance criteria;
- relevant guardrails and metis;
- RNA graph impact for the changed areas.
- Do not read or request the implementation session, implementation reasoning, prior conversation, or a summary defending the chosen solution.
Review contract
- Verify every acceptance criterion against the diff.
- Check relevant hard and soft guardrails.
- Check changed-area impact and likely regressions using the provided RNA context.
- Identify concrete correctness, security, maintainability, testing, delivery, and policy-consistency findings.
- Return exactly one binding verdict:
APPROVE— no unresolved actionable findings.REQUEST CHANGES— one or more actionable findings must be fixed.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 407 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A e04b1d89471b
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository open-horizon-labs/repo-native-alignment (5 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 2,939 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…