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 agentmods add skills/prisma/prisma-next/adr-reviewnpx skills add prisma/prisma-next --skill adr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/prisma/prisma-nextWrote 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/prisma/prisma-next/adr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/prisma/prisma-next/adr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/prisma/prisma-next/adr-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00064 | $0.00568 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00284 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00114 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00057 |
Grade A, and why
adr-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 2d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to adr-review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 45 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewing and Rewriting ADRs
Read each ADR with fresh eyes. Pretend you're a member of the team who doesn't have all the context the author has. The goal is to find places where the document assumes context the reader doesn't have, buries the decision, or carries baggage that won't make sense to a future reader.
This skill applies whether you're working on a single ADR or a batch. Treat each ADR independently — do the analysis and rewrite per document — even when several are in scope at once.
Workflow
- Analyze first, in chat. Before touching any file, list the issues you found and explain them. Do not rewrite silently. When multiple ADRs are in scope, group your analysis per ADR so the user can react to each one before rewrites land.
- Then rewrite each document to address the issues you identified.
What a good ADR looks like
- Starts with a clear grounding example. Give the reader something concrete to pin understanding to before the abstract reasoning starts.
- Has a strong narrative that builds the topic up bit by bit, explaining clearly throughout. Don't compress; let ideas breathe.
- Leads with the decision. State what's being decided up front. The reader should know the conclusion before working through the reasoning.
- Ends with alternatives considered. Put rejected options last so the reader isn't loaded down with information about paths the document is making irrelevant.
What an ADR must NOT contain
ADRs are long-lived documentation. They should not contain:
- References to Linear tickets, GitHub issues, or other ticket trackers.
- Milestones from the project that produced the ADR.
- States the system passed through during or preceding a refactor that will never be seen again — interim names, deprecated wrappers being removed, "current" qualifiers, "we used to" framing.
If a piece of context only makes sense to someone who lived through the change, cut it or rewrite it as a fact about the system as it is.
Output shape
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 45 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A 3646b2be5297
adr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository prisma/prisma-next (419 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 568 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to adr-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
draft-release-notes
Author the committed release-notes file for a Prisma 8 release (stable or 8.0.0-rc.N) by enumerating the merged PRs since the previous release v tag (stable or -rc.N), resolving opaque TML-NNNN: titles via Linear context (never copied verbatim), triaging public-worthiness, and writing categorized notes — breaking…
record-upgrade-instructions
Record upgrade instructions alongside a Prisma Next breaking-change PR, so downstream consumers (users of @internal/ and authors of Prisma Next extensions) can apply the matching code translation automatically via the published upgrade skills. Use when you have refactored framework code and the test suite went red in…
create-pr
Creates a GitHub PR with a Linear-ticket-prefixed title and a decision-led, narrative description for prisma-next. Use when the user wants to create a pull request, open a PR, or submit changes for review.
triage-contributor-pr
Triage open pull requests from external contributors to prisma/prisma and produce a per-PR verdict with evidence. Use when a maintainer asks to triage, evaluate, assess, or review the queue of incoming contributor PRs, to decide whether a fork PR is safe to run CI on, to check whether a PR is in scope for its version…
contrib-pr
Open a high-quality external contributor PR against prisma/orm. Use when the user is an outside contributor (not a Prisma maintainer) and wants to submit a change as a pull request from a fork. Encodes the contribution flow from CONTRIBUTING.md so the resulting PR passes review on the first round.
psl-ast-layers
How to use the PSL syntax tree layers (green tree, red tree, strongly-typed AST classes) correctly. Use for any PSL-related work: PSL interpreters (contract-psl), helpers inside the psl-parser package, the language server, formatters, or anything else that consumes parse() output from @internal/psl-parser.