Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to phase-rs/phase. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/phase-rs/phase/main/.claude/skills/review-engine-plan/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/phase-rs/phaseWrote 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/phase-rs/phase/review-engine-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/phase-rs/phase/review-engine-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/phase-rs/phase/review-engine-plan/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/phase-rs/phase/review-engine-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/phase-rs/phase/review-engine-plan.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 | $0.00069 | $0.04045 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.01618 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00809 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00404 |
Grade A, and why
review-engine-plan 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 21d 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 — 179 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Engine Plan
Review the plan as an architectural gate. Reject the plan if any required dimension is missing, superficial, or contradicted by code evidence.
Probe policy — answer a concrete design uncertainty
You are not a read-only reviewer. Building and running throwaway probes is an expected part of this review, and it is the only instrument that can refute a plan whose prose is internally consistent but whose runtime behaviour differs. Static review structurally cannot catch a predicate that reads correctly and answers wrongly on a real board.
Prefer existing tests, fixtures, commands or supported tool APIs. Small probes may answer a disputed premise; they do not authorize a separate driver, seeding service or verification framework. Honor the caller's execution constraints, including a no-build constraint, and report unavailable evidence rather than bypassing it.
In every engine-implementer mode, use the supplied original task and scope/attempt history and follow its task scope and run limits. Machinery, before or after measurement, needs the orchestrator's accepted expansion case. A reviewer can identify a missing check, but returns it to the orchestrator instead of independently expanding or repairing tooling. Required correctness evidence remains required.
When execution is permitted, use an isolated CARGO_TARGET_DIR and the worktree's absolute path; never build in a checkout another process (e.g. Tilt) owns; serialize probe activity behind any active implementation executor.
Scout fact pack
A scout fact pack may accompany the plan, the same one the planner received. Treat it as unverified leads: check anything you rely on, and look beyond it. A missing fact is not evidence of absence, and the pack never bounds a sweep: check 3's rg of existing instances and check 9's construction/consumption enumeration are yours to run in full.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 21d ago Changed · +9 lines 9ea07f120c3c
- 24d ago Changed · +4 lines 1f3053939eea
- 29d ago Changed · +6 lines 7e9684518230
- 1mo ago Changed · +7 lines f1fa190caa52
- 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines 34c844c81742
- 1mo ago Changed · +2 lines 970e756e905c
- 2mo ago First seen · 150 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A aa92384e6a1a
review-engine-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository phase-rs/phase (312 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 4,045 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
critic-contract
Shared read-side contract every read-only CRITIC imports — adversarial stance, empirical verification of runtime-behavior claims, the mandatory self-red-team before APPROVE, how a finding is stated (quote the span, take the UNKNOWN escape hatch) and held (only new evidence moves a severity, never pushback), spec-UB…
code-quality
Shared clean-code / DRY / KISS / YAGNI standards and stack-specific smells for the React 19 + TypeScript + Rust (Tauri 2) monorepo. Library consumed by the code-quality-reviewer and code-quality-author agents.
review-workflow
The implement→review flow under the ≤3-reviewer budget with the conditional test stage. Use for /implement-feature, /fix-bug, /refactor-module and any change that needs structured review.
anarlog
Query Anarlog meetings, notes, summaries, transcripts, participants, action items, and recurring history, or import a local recording. Use when a user asks about their Anarlog meeting data or needs meeting context for another task.
graphify-windows
Turn any folder of files into a navigable knowledge graph with community detection, an honest audit trail, and three outputs: interactive HTML, GraphRAG-ready JSON, and a plain-language GRAPHREPORT.md.
lessons
How to propose and query distilled lessons (the experiential memory). Only project-steward persists; every other agent proposes/queries. Use when you discover a durable lesson or need prior experience for the current task.