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 OutThisLife/brooklyn-skills --skill pr-readygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OutThisLife/brooklyn-skillsWrote 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/outthislife/brooklyn-skills/pr-ready)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/outthislife/brooklyn-skills/pr-ready"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/outthislife/brooklyn-skills/pr-ready/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/outthislife/brooklyn-skills/pr-ready"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/outthislife/brooklyn-skills/pr-ready.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 | $0.00074 | $0.00782 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00391 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
pr-ready 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 10d 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 — 75 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Ready
An open PR/MR isn't mergeable. Two things block it — a stale base or red CI, and open review threads. Same loop for both: fix, push, re-query the forge, repeat. Handle whichever is blocking; usually that's both.
No feature work. No drive-bys.
Rebase + CI
- Find the worktree for this PR (or create one per repo convention). Prefer an existing worktree the user already has.
git fetch origin <default>(usuallymain).- Rebase onto
origin/<default>. Fix conflicts only as needed to preserve intent. - Push (
--force-with-leaseif the rebase rewrote history). - Watch CI. Fix failures caused by the rebase or existing breakage on this branch — nothing else.
- Flaky upstream on the default branch → say so. Don't paper over it with unrelated test deletes.
Review threads
- Commit/push any unpushed work first (ask if the message is unclear).
- List open/unresolved inline comments + review bodies.
- Want a bot pass? Request the repo's review bot, then wait for it — don't spin forever; if it's stuck ~10–15m, say so.
- Per comment: valid → fix and resolve. Wrong or outdated → short reply and
resolve. Nit out of scope → ask once. Never resolve a #1 maintainer comment
without fixing it or an explicit override (
pr-triage). - Push (
pr-updateif they want the commits split). - Repeat until unresolved threads are gone, or only ones they OK'd deferring.
Done when
Re-query the forge — don't trust that a push turned CI green or that a reply resolved a thread. Fail closed: any red check or open thread means you're not done.
Report the branch tip, checks status, and a short fixed-vs-replied summary.
Scope lock
- No refactors, restyles, or "while I'm here" fixes.
- Don't expand the PR description or supersede unless asked (
pr-update). - Wrong-premise PR that needs salvage → stop and say so, hand off to
pr-triage. Don't silently rewrite it.
Forge cheatsheet
# GitHub — CI
gh pr view <N> --json url,headRefName,baseRefName,statusCheckRollup
gh pr checks <N>
# GitHub — threads
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<N>/comments --jq '.[] | {user:.user.login,path,line,body:(.body[:200])}'
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<N>/reviews --jq '.[] | {user:.user.login,state,body:(.body[:200])}'
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/<N>/comments -f body='…' -F in_reply_to=<comment_id>
gh pr edit <N> --add-reviewer copilot # if that's what the repo uses
# GitLab
glab mr view <N>
glab ci status
glab mr note <N> # + the discussions API for resolve
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 75 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A ccd5f8bf3a1d
pr-ready is a skill published in the GitHub repository OutThisLife/brooklyn-skills (191 stars, last pushed 23d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 782 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…
github-contributor
End-to-end playbook for shipping high-quality pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — discovery, CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size check, minimal-diff implementation, PR description with AI-assisted disclosure, conflict resolution, and post-submission maintainer interaction. Use whenever creating…
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…
write-pr
Reference standards for writing pull request titles and descriptions in the tldraw repository, plus the pre-flight comment sweep over the diff. Use as supporting guidance when another skill or workflow needs PR content standards, not as the user-facing create/update PR workflow.