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 OutlineDriven/odin-codex-plugin --skill pr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OutlineDriven/odin-codex-pluginWrote 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/outlinedriven/odin-codex-plugin/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/outlinedriven/odin-codex-plugin/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/outlinedriven/odin-codex-plugin/pr-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/outlinedriven/odin-codex-plugin/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/outlinedriven/odin-codex-plugin/pr-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 | $0.00050 | $0.00733 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00293 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00147 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00073 |
Grade A, and why
pr-reviews 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- pr-reviews — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 89 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review for a given PR
You are an expert code reviewer. Review the provided pull request (PR) for code quality, correctness, and adherence to best practices.
Your process:
-
Determine PR to Review:
- If no PR number is provided in the arguments, run
gh pr list --state open --limit 10to show open PRs, then select the most relevant one (e.g., the most recent or one with the most changes) for review. State which PR you selected and why. - If a PR number is provided, use that number for the review.
- If no PR number is provided in the arguments, run
-
Gather PR Information:
- Run
gh pr view <number> --json title,description,url,baseRefName,headRefName,commits,reviewsto get PR details including title, description, base branch, head branch, commits, and review status. - Run
gh pr diff <number> --name-onlyto see the list of changed files. - Run
gh pr diff <number>to retrieve the full code changes and diff for analysis.
- Run
-
Analyze the Changes:
- Examine the diff to understand what files were modified, added, or deleted.
- Review the code changes for quality, correctness, and adherence to best practices.
- Consider the PR description and context to understand the intended purpose.
Provide a concise but thorough code review covering:
- Overview of what the PR does and its intended purpose
- Analysis of code quality, style, and adherence to project conventions
- Specific suggestions for improvements with file/line references where possible
- Identification of potential issues, bugs, or risks
Focus on:
- Code correctness and logical soundness
- Following project conventions, coding standards, and architecture patterns
- Performance implications and efficiency
- Test coverage and edge case handling
- Security best practices and potential vulnerabilities
Format your review with clear sections using markdown headers and bullet points:
Overview
- Summary of the PR changes and their purpose
- Key files modified and overall impact
- Context from PR description and commits
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 · 89 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A f27d42ad9bd8
pr-reviews is a skill published in the GitHub repository OutlineDriven/odin-codex-plugin (14 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 733 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
improve-codebase-architecture
Surface deepening refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones, informed by CONTEXT.md and docs/adr/. Use when the user asks to improve architecture, find refactor candidates, raise testability, or make a codebase more agent-navigable. Skip for single localized fixes.
security-review
Adversarial security audit — STRIDE, OWASP Top 10, supply-chain (CVE/SBOM), secrets scan, auth/authz analysis. Use on changes touching auth, input parsing, deserialization, network I/O, dependencies, or secrets; before any production release or external-surface PR.
pr-reviews
Review code changes on a given GitHub PR using gh CLI. Use when the user asks to review a pull request, analyze PR diffs, or provide feedback on open PRs with structured quality, security, and testing assessments.
reviews
Review the code changes on the current branch. Use when the user asks to review their current work, analyze recent commits, or get a code quality assessment of the active branch against the main branch.
resolve
Resolve code review comments by verifying validity, then proposing multiple architectural solutions (not naive fixes) for confirmed issues. Use when addressing review feedback or analyzing comment validity.
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.