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 Quinoto-Tech/QuinotoSpec --skill quinotospec-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Quinoto-Tech/QuinotoSpecWrote 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/quinoto-tech/quinotospec/quinotospec-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/quinoto-tech/quinotospec/quinotospec-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/quinoto-tech/quinotospec/quinotospec-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/quinoto-tech/quinotospec/quinotospec-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/quinoto-tech/quinotospec/quinotospec-review.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00852 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00341 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
quinotospec-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 1mo 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
Workflow: Review
Este workflow guía al agente para realizar una revisión técnica de código antes de mergear, validando contra los criterios definidos en la especificación.
Parámetros Requeridos:
TASK_ID: El ID de la tarea técnica asociada al branch (ej.TSK-AUTH-001).BRANCH_NAME: El nombre del branch a revisar (ej.feature/TSK-AUTH-001-add-login).
Instrucciones:
-
Contexto de la revisión:
- Lee el archivo de tareas correspondiente al
{{TASK_ID}}en.quinoto-spec/proposals/{{PROPOSAL_SLUG}}/{{US_ID}}_tasks.md. - Lee la propuesta en
.quinoto-spec/proposals/{{PROPOSAL_SLUG}}/proposal.md, en especial las secciones de Criterios de Aceptación (DoD) y Especificación Técnica Detallada. - Lee
01-stack-profile.mdpara conocer los estándares de código del proyecto. - Si existe
.quinoto-spec/constitution.mdcon estadoactive, lee sus principios y gates; si está ausente, registra una advertencia de compatibilidad.
- Lee el archivo de tareas correspondiente al
-
Análisis del branch:
- Obtén el diff del branch contra la rama base:
git diff main...{{BRANCH_NAME}} - Lista los archivos modificados:
git diff --name-only main...{{BRANCH_NAME}}
- Obtén el diff del branch contra la rama base:
-
Checklist de revisión: Valida cada uno de los siguientes puntos y documenta el resultado (✅ / ❌ / ⚠️):
- Criterios de Aceptación (DoD): ¿Cada criterio definido en la tarea está cubierto por el código?
- Cobertura de tests: ¿Se agregaron tests para la lógica nueva? ¿Pasan correctamente?
- Convenciones del stack: ¿El código sigue los patrones detectados en
01-stack-profile.md? - Archivos declarados: ¿Los archivos modificados coinciden con los declarados en la columna "Archivos a Modificar" de la tarea?
- Sin regresiones: ¿La suite de tests completa pasa sin errores?
- Compliance constitucional: si la constitución está activa, ¿cada principio aplicable tiene evidencia o una excepción aprobada?
- Sin deuda técnica obvia: ¿No hay TODOs sin resolver, console.logs, o código comentado que no debería estar?
-
Feedback recibido:
- Si una persona, reviewer externo o bot envía comentarios, invoca
quinotospec-receive-review. - Verifica el feedback antes de aceptarlo; no implementes cambios directamente desde este workflow.
- Si la respuesta es correcta, aplica los cambios mediante
quinotospec-applyy conserva sus gates. - Si el feedback viola YAGNI, falta contexto o rompe funcionalidad, responde con push back técnico.
- Reconoce feedback corregido con
Fixed. [Brief description], sin acuerdo performativo.
- Si una persona, reviewer externo o bot envía comentarios, invoca
-
Resultado de la revisión:
- Si todos los puntos son ✅ → el branch está listo para mergear. Notificar al usuario.
- Si hay ❌ o ⚠️ → generar un informe detallado de los puntos a corregir antes de mergear.
Instrucción Final OBLIGATORIA (Changelog):
Una vez completada la revisión, DEBES ejecutar la skill quinotospec-update-changelog.
- Título de la Acción: Code Review: {{TASK_ID}}
- Resumen: Se revisó el branch '{{BRANCH_NAME}}'. Resultado: [Aprobado / Requiere Cambios]. Puntos pendientes: [lista si aplica].
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · +9 lines af36cb6550fa
- 1mo ago First seen · 49 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 95f6698787ac
quinotospec-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Quinoto-Tech/QuinotoSpec (21 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 852 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…