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 palimkarakshay/abap-mcp --skill abap-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/palimkarakshay/abap-mcpWrote 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/palimkarakshay/abap-mcp/abap-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/palimkarakshay/abap-mcp/abap-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/palimkarakshay/abap-mcp/abap-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/palimkarakshay/abap-mcp/abap-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/palimkarakshay/abap-mcp/abap-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 | $0.00060 | $0.00475 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00237 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00095 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00047 |
Grade A, and why
abap-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 11d 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.
What it actually says
ABAP Review
Use the connected abap-mcp tools to ground a senior-consultant review in observable findings.
Workflow
- Resolve the source in scope. The MCP server accepts source text, not paths: read any user-named workspace files first and pass their full text with stable filenames. If the scope is unclear, ask instead of guessing. Batch more than 32 files or files over 100,000 characters.
- Run
lint_abapwith the defaultstylepreset. Usefocus: "Performance","Security", or"Styleguide"only when that lens matches the request. Usefullonly when all relevant dependencies are supplied. - Triage findings by production impact, then severity. For important or unfamiliar rule keys, call
explain_abap_rule; explain why the rule matters and propose the smallest concrete fix. - For ABAP Cloud or Clean Core questions, also run
check_cloud_readiness. Treat language blockers separately from its dated, informationalreleasedApiFindings. A clean result is a static-parser verdict, not certification. - If the user authorizes edits, preserve the original text, make focused changes, rerun
lint_abap, then usecompare_abapwith before and after sources. Report new, resolved, and remaining findings and any readiness-grade movement. - Finish with a concise verdict: ready for the next engineering gate, or the shortlist of changes that still gate it.
Honesty boundaries
- The server analyzes only supplied text, entirely offline. It does not connect to SAP, inspect repository paths, run code, or execute ATC.
- Released-API observations come from the bundled snapshot and are dated. Keep them out of the language-blocker score and say that target-system ATC is authoritative.
- Do not claim that behavior definitions or service definitions received deep abaplint validation.
- Review does not imply permission to edit files; make changes only when the user asks.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 25 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 57f9354e4893
abap-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository palimkarakshay/abap-mcp (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 475 once invoked, about $0.0003 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…