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 ReviewStage/stage-cli --skill stage-resolvegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ReviewStage/stage-cliWrote 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/reviewstage/stage-cli/stage-resolve)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/reviewstage/stage-cli/stage-resolve"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/reviewstage/stage-cli/stage-resolve/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/reviewstage/stage-cli/stage-resolve"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/reviewstage/stage-cli/stage-resolve.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 | $0.00031 | $0.01258 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00503 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00252 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00126 |
Grade A, and why
stage-resolve 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
stage-resolve
Reads the local review comments the user left in the Stage browser UI (created by /stage-chapters), acts on each open thread, and resolves it. Uses stagereview comments, which reads and writes the same local database the UI uses — the stagereview show server does not need to be running, and the UI picks up your replies and resolutions automatically.
Every comment you write through the CLI is attributed to the agent and shows an "Agent" badge in the UI, so the user can tell your replies from their own notes.
Prerequisites
Run this check before any other work. If it fails, stop with the error message — do not continue.
-
stagereviewis installed. Runwhich stagereview. If it exits non-zero, instruct the user:stagereview is not installed. Run: npm install -g stagereview
Arguments
- Diff selectors. Pass through any git refs or flags the user gave (
--pr 123,--base main,--ref staged,main..feature, …) to everylistandcreatecall exactly as given. They select the same diff scope/stage-chaptersused, so you see the threads the UI shows. With no arguments the CLI uses the same default scopestagereview showuses for the working tree. - A single thread ID (full UUID or a prefix of at least 6 characters). When given, handle only that thread and skip the listing step.
Step 1 — List open threads
Run this before editing any files, and keep the output — you will address threads by the IDs it returns:
stagereview comments list --status open --json [refs...] [--pr <ref>] [--base <ref>] [--compare <ref>] [--ref <mode>]
Each thread has id, filePath, side (additions = new file lines, deletions = old file lines), startLine, endLine, status, and comments ordered oldest first. Each comment carries body, authorType (user or agent), and timestamps.
If the list is empty, tell the user there are no open comment threads for this diff and stop.
The diff scope is keyed on git state. If the working tree was clean when the review was opened and you then edit files, a later
listwith no arguments resolves to a different (working-tree) scope. Address threads by ID (show,reply,resolve,reopenare not scoped), and do not commit while working through threads unless the user asks.
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 First seen · 98 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A a89ddc69ca57
stage-resolve is a skill published in the GitHub repository ReviewStage/stage-cli (274 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 1,258 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 2026-09-07.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…