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 RelationalAI/rai-agent-skills --skill dev-skills-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RelationalAI/rai-agent-skillsWrote 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/relationalai/rai-agent-skills/dev-skills-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/relationalai/rai-agent-skills/dev-skills-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/relationalai/rai-agent-skills/dev-skills-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/relationalai/rai-agent-skills/dev-skills-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/relationalai/rai-agent-skills/dev-skills-review.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 | $0.00048 | $0.02004 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01002 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00401 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00200 |
Grade A, and why
dev-skills-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 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
RAI Skills Review
Litmus Test: Agent Usability
The ultimate quality gate. Everything below serves this — if an agent can't discover, navigate, adapt, and execute from the skill alone, the skill isn't done.
- Discovery: Given a realistic user task, does the skill's
descriptioncause it to trigger (and not trigger for unrelated tasks)? - Navigation: Can an agent find the right section/example within the skill in 1-2 lookups (not wandering)?
- Pattern adaptation: Given a novel problem, can an agent locate a relevant example pattern and adapt it to a new domain without hallucinating API calls?
- Self-sufficiency: Can an agent go from skill content to working code without needing external docs, clarification, or guessing?
- Negative test: Does the skill clearly redirect the agent when the task is out of scope (via "When NOT to use" pointers)?
Structure
- YAML frontmatter with
nameanddescription(one line, imperative mood, trigger-ready, under 1024 characters) - Description answers two questions: (1) WHAT the skill covers, framed from user-intent angle not implementation mechanics; (2) WHEN Claude should invoke it, including cases where the user doesn't name the domain directly ("even if they don't mention X"). One sentence, both halves present.
-
SKILL.mdat root,references/for deep-dive,examples/if applicable -
## Summarywith What, When to use, When NOT to use, Overview -
## Quick Referencenear top — tables/code blocks, not prose -
## Common Pitfallstable (Mistake / Cause / Fix) captures counterintuitive, environment-specific facts the agent would get wrong without being told — not generic advice -
## Examplestable linking to example files -
## Reference fileswith "when to use" framing - Stability classification (
v1-STABLEorv1-SENSITIVE) below title
Content Quality
- SKILL.md body under 500 lines
- One term per concept throughout (no synonym alternation)
- Examples don't contradict any documented rule/pattern
- Reference files use same API style as SKILL.md
- Progressive disclosure: metadata (L1) -> instructions (L2) -> bundled resources (L3)
- References one level deep from SKILL.md (no deep nesting)
- Degrees of freedom match task fragility (narrow bridge = specific; open field = general)
- No explaining the obvious: omit what the agent already knows (general concepts, standard libraries, common protocols) — every token should earn its place
- Concise over exhaustive: stepwise guidance with a working example beats encyclopedic coverage — if content covers every edge case, check whether most are better left to agent judgment
- Defaults over menus: when multiple tools/approaches apply, one is the default with brief escape hatch — not equal-weight lists of options
- Short, generic parentheticals: keep inline "e.g." examples short and generic. Drop overly-specific example phrases unless they disambiguate a rule — when in doubt, cut them.
- Extracted content keeps an entry point: when content moves to a reference file (line-count, depth, or scope reasons), SKILL.md retains (a) an inline summary or canonical table for the extracted topic, (b) a specific load-trigger pointer naming what's in the reference file, AND (c) a Reference Files table row. The agent must still discover the topic from SKILL.md alone.
- Grounded, not generic: guidance reflects specific APIs, conventions, and failure modes — if a paragraph could apply to any project ("follow best practices", "handle errors appropriately"), cut or replace it with the project-specific rule it's standing in for
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 · 108 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A bc56befa2e5d
dev-skills-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository RelationalAI/rai-agent-skills (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 2,004 once invoked, about $0.0002 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…