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 OpenCoven/coven --skill codeflow-maintainergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OpenCoven/covenWrote 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/opencoven/coven/codeflow-maintainer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/opencoven/coven/codeflow-maintainer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/opencoven/coven/codeflow-maintainer/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/opencoven/coven/codeflow-maintainer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/opencoven/coven/codeflow-maintainer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00039 | $0.01323 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00529 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00265 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00132 |
Grade A, and why
codeflow-maintainer 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CodeFlow Maintainer Skill
Source of Truth
PR_WORKFLOW.md: https://github.com/openclaw/maintainers/blob/main/.agents/skills/PR_WORKFLOW.md
This skill is OpenClaw-only. It implements the workflow defined in
openclaw/maintainers for OpenClaw repositories. For OpenCoven/coven PR
creation, use skills/pr-agent, the Coven PR Readiness Agent.
Working Rule
Skills execute workflow. Maintainers provide judgment. Always pause between skills to evaluate technical direction, not just command success.
Workflow Modes
1. Triage
Purpose: Assess whether PR is worth reviewing.
Focus:
- Is the problem statement clear?
- Does a realistic verification path exist?
- Is this PR worth our time?
- Are there duplicates?
Recommendation: Proceed to Review, Request Info, or Close.
Agent prompt:
[Mode: TRIAGE] Assess whether this PR is worth reviewing.
Focus on problem clarity, scope match, duplicate detection.
DO NOT suggest code changes, approvals, or merges.
2. Review (review-pr)
Purpose: Review only — produce findings and recommendation. DO NOT modify code.
Quality bar:
- Do not trust PR code by default
- Keep types strict (no
any) - Evaluate security impact and abuse paths
- Understand the system before changing it
Finding severities:
BLOCKER— must fix before prepareIMPORTANT— must fix before prepareMINOR— should fix (optional)NOTE— informational only
Artifacts: .local/review.md, .local/review.json
Checkpoint before advancing:
- What problem are they trying to solve?
- What is the most optimal implementation?
- Can we fix up everything?
- Do we have any questions?
Agent prompt:
[Mode: REVIEW] Produce findings, DO NOT modify code.
Focus: correctness, security, tests, types, scope, hardening.
Severity: BLOCKER > IMPORTANT > MINOR > NOTE.
Recommendation: READY FOR PREPARE, NEEDS WORK, NEEDS DISCUSSION, or CLOSE.
3. Prepare (prepare-pr)
Purpose: Make PR merge-ready on its head branch.
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 · 178 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 6109b0b34b95
codeflow-maintainer is a skill published in the GitHub repository OpenCoven/coven (72 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 1,323 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
github-pr-workflow
Prepare a GitHub pull request from a feature branch — branch hygiene, commit shape, title/body, verification notes, screenshots for UI work, and replies to review comments.
pr-workflow
Prepares branches and PRs for clean, reviewable merges.
pr-comment
Answer a maintainer's question about an open PR with concrete, code-cited evidence. The PR-side counterpart to issue-comment — for questions tied to the diff, not a full review.
llm-gate
LLM-powered quality verification using prompt hooks. Validates commit messages, code patterns, and conventions using AI before allowing operations. Use to set up intelligent guardrails.
smart-commit
Run quality gates, review staged changes for issues, and create a well-crafted conventional commit. Use when saying "commit", "git commit", "save my changes", or ready to commit after making changes.
openclaw-github-repo-commander
7-stage super workflow for GitHub repo audit, cleanup, PR review, and competitor analysis.