seven-pass-review

seven-pass-review is a skill for Claude Code from pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow. It costs 70 tokens per session (2,668 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A seven-part adversarial review of an academic manuscript. Separate reviewers examine the abstract, introduction, methods, results, robustness, prose, and citations, then combine their findings into a prioritized revision list.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it on submission-ready or revise-and-resubmit papers when you need a detailed revision plan across the whole manuscript.
Why use it?
It provides broader coverage than a single review and helps expose problems that may be missed when all aspects are checked together.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter. Also seen: reads .claude/ paths; mentions subagents; positional $N argument.

Needs its repository: it runs a file that does not travel with it, so clone the repository first. The line is echo '[]' | python3 scripts/validate-findings.py.

Good fit Use it on submission-ready or revise-and-resubmit papers when you need a detailed revision plan across the whole manuscript.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
About the project

claude-code-my-workflow is a forkable setup for using Claude Code to produce and review academic papers, slides, data analyses, and replication packages. Researchers use its agents, skills, rules, hooks, and quality checks to coordinate these tasks and verify their results. The catalogue entries define the reusable workflow components for Claude Code.

pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow · 1,570 stars · on GitHub · psantanna.com

Install

Getting it into your agent

It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow
agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/seven-pass-review

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for seven-pass-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/seven-pass-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/seven-pass-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/seven-pass-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/seven-pass-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for seven-pass-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/seven-pass-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/seven-pass-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 70 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,668 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 3 findings, up to medium

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

  • medium Agent Snooping · line 181
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 182
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 183
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00070 $0.02668
Opus 5 $0.00035 $0.01334
Sonnet 5 $0.00014 $0.00534
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00267

Measured 7d ago against content hash b7911c14bae4, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

seven-pass-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 7d 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.

.claude/skills/seven-pass-review/SKILL.md · 196 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 196 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Seven-Pass Adversarial Review

Runs seven independent reviewers, each focused on a single lens, then synthesizes their findings into one prioritized revision plan — the fan-out → reduce → judge runtime from orchestrator-protocol.md, applied with seven lenses.

Why seven passes? A single-agent review blends lenses and softens each one. Seven forked agents each approach the paper with full context budget for their own lens, then a synthesizer resolves conflicts and de-duplicates.

When to pick this over /review-paper: This skill costs roughly 7× more tokens than /review-paper (default) and ~2× more than /review-paper --adversarial. Use it when the paper is submission-ready or at R&R stage and you need maximum lens coverage. For early drafts or iterative work, /review-paper is the right tool. For journal-simulation pressure test, use /review-paper --peer <journal> instead.

Inputs

  • $0 — manuscript path (.tex, .qmd, .md, or .pdf). Required.

The Seven Lenses

Each lens runs as a forked subagent (context: fork) so the main conversation stays clean.

# Lens Focus Agent type
1 Abstract audit Does the abstract state the question, method, result, and contribution? Does it match the paper? general-purpose
2 Intro structure Does the intro follow Cochrane / Varian framework? Literature placement? Contribution clarity? general-purpose
3 Methods / identification Are assumptions stated? Is identification credible? Are alternatives addressed? domain-reviewer
4 Results + tables Do tables read standalone? Is magnitude + significance discussed? Units consistent? general-purpose
5 Robustness Are obvious threats pre-empted? Is the robustness section convincing or theatrical? general-purpose
6 Prose quality Sentence-level clarity, hedging, passive voice, paragraph cohesion proofreader
7 Citation audit Invokes /validate-bib --semantic; checks cite-claim direction for top-10 works general-purpose

Read the full file on GitHub · 196 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 7d ago First seen · 196 lines · 70 tokens per session scan A b7911c14bae4

Subscribe to this mod's changes

seven-pass-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow (1,570 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 70 tokens to every session and 2,668 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 2026-09-03.