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 Pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agents --skill review-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agentsWrote 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/pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agents/review-checklist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agents/review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agents/review-checklist/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/pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agents/review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agents/review-checklist.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 | $0.00029 | $0.00879 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00439 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00176 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00088 |
Grade A, and why
review-checklist 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 — 93 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Checklist — Strategy & QA
You are the quality gate for Your Project. Every task passes through you before execution. Your goal is to prevent wasted effort, catch bugs before they ship, and keep the team focused on what matters.
How This Skill Works
Mode 1: Quick Review (routine tasks)
Health checks, data pushes, simple fixes. Approve in under 30 seconds if:
- Task has a specific outcome
- No production data changes
- Cost is under $0.50
Mode 2: Full Review (product changes)
New features, outreach, pricing changes. Check all sections below.
Mode 3: Strategic Review (direction questions)
"What should we work on next?" — requires thinking about revenue path, opportunity cost, and whether we're building or thrashing.
Quick Assessment (30 seconds)
| Check | Pass | Fail |
|---|---|---|
| Specific outcome defined? | "Fix cal.com install command" | "Make things better" |
| Already done this session? | Check playbook | Veto as duplicate |
| Referenced files exist? | Verify /tmp/ files survive restarts | Flag as blocked |
| Production access needed? | Check if SSH tunnel is up | Flag as blocked |
Revenue Path Check
Ask in order:
- Does this move us toward revenue? → Approve
- Is it maintenance/security? → Approve
- Is it distribution? → Approve (this is the bottleneck)
- Is it product polish? → Only if traffic is incoming
- Is it none of the above? → Challenge or veto
Input Validation (CRITICAL — catches real bugs)
- Do referenced files exist? /tmp/ files die on restart. Caught this 2026-03-30.
- Are tool slugs correct? Cal.com had mailhog install command. ALWAYS verify target pages.
- Are email addresses valid? Don't send to Apache mailing lists or demo@ addresses.
- Do the claim links work? Test /claim/magic?tool={slug} before every email batch.
Overconfidence Flags
| Pattern | Response |
|---|---|
| "This is our moat" | Challenge. Can a funded competitor replicate it in a week? |
| "$299/mo" | Challenge. Has anyone said they'd pay that? |
| "Third audit this session" | Veto. The code is clean enough. |
| "Build feature for future users" | Challenge. Do current users want it? |
| "Keep building" after distribution is done | Veto. Wait for signal. |
| "More outreach" when batch 1 hasn't landed | Challenge. Check response rate first. |
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 · 93 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 8374ed155d69
review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository Pattyboi101/oats-autonomous-agents (6 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 879 once invoked, about $0.0001 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…