Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to ric03uec/clawrium. 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/ric03uec/clawrium/main/.claude/skills/itx-review-pr/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ric03uec/clawriumWrote 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/ric03uec/clawrium/itx-review-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ric03uec/clawrium/itx-review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ric03uec/clawrium/itx-review-pr/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/ric03uec/clawrium/itx-review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ric03uec/clawrium/itx-review-pr.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 | $0.00012 | $0.01799 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00899 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00360 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00180 |
Grade A, and why
itx-review-pr scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 259 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Review
Request a code review for a pull request.
Instructions
-
Identify PR:
- If PR number provided, use it
- If not, find PR for current branch:
gh pr view --json number,title,url
-
Get PR Details:
gh pr view <number> --json number,title,body,files,additions,deletions gh pr diff <number> -
Check Review Configuration:
ITX_CONFIG="$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)/.claude/itx-config.json" if [ -f "$ITX_CONFIG" ]; then REVIEW_ENABLED=$(jq -r '.mcp.review_enabled // false' "$ITX_CONFIG") else REVIEW_ENABLED="false" fi -
Execute Review:
If Automated Review Enabled
Attempt each transport in order. Tool identifiers differ by harness, so do not invoke a configured or example name unless it is available in the current harness. An unavailable, failed, or timed-out attempt falls through to the next step.
- ATX via MCP: Inspect the current tool list for an ATX request-review
tool. If one is available, invoke it with
Review PR #<number>. If MCP is unavailable, fails, or times out, continue to the CLI step. - ATX via CLI: Check
command -v atxand requireatx server statusto reportRunning: true. If both checks pass, run the stateless review command so the result does not depend on harness-specific hooks:
If the CLI is unavailable, stopped, fails, or times out, continue to manual review.atx review request \ --prompt "Review PR #<number>, including its full diff and tests." \ --format json --timeout 15m - Manual review: After both automated transports are exhausted, use the manual checklist below and state clearly which attempts were unavailable or failed.
Process Automated Review Results:
- If rating <= 3/5 or blocking issues exist:
- List issues to fix
- Recommend specific changes
- If rating > 3/5 and no blockers:
- PR is ready for merge
Report:
## Automated Review Summary
**PR**: #<number> - <title>
**Rating**: <X>/5
### Blocking Issues
<table or "None">
### Warnings
<list or "None">
### Suggestions
<list or "None">
### Verdict
<READY FOR MERGE / NEEDS CHANGES>
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 Changed · +19 lines 210f12719e4d
- 8d ago Changed · -1 lines · -1 tokens per session 4d6615660d3c
- 12d ago First seen · 241 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 05b08da6ea72
itx-review-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository ric03uec/clawrium (51 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 1,799 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
python
Use when the task is Python itself, in any framework or none: PEP 695 generics, mypy --strict typing, dataclass/Protocol/TypedDict/Enum choices, asyncio.TaskGroup, stdlib idioms, src/ layout + pyproject.toml with uv, ruff+mypy+pytest gate. NOT a FastAPI/ASGI service (that is fastapi), NOT a deep pytest suite (that is…
pir-action-tracker
Parses Post-Incident Review (PIR) pages in a Confluence space, fetches live status from referenced Jira tickets, updates action item tables with current status and due dates, marks completed PIRs with a visual closure panel, and surfaces any overdue actions for follow-up. Designed for Customer Success, Support, and…
code-review-python
Deep Python-specific code review covering type annotations, async pitfalls, mutable defaults, threading safety, and domain modeling. Applied in addition to the generic code-review skill when Python code is detected. Invoked when reviewing Python PRs, Py changes, or performing Python-specific quality checks.
agentic-preflight
Use when shipping a branch — reviewing, documenting, linting, testing, and pushing work behind a quality gate. Also use when a push is blocked by the agentic-preflight pre-push hook or when the user says agentic-preflight:uninstall to remove this tool from the current project.
aget-release-critique
Adversarial review with the Critic perspective of the Release Delivery Triad (L818). Dual-mandate: spec coverage audit + deep bug finding.
karpathy-guidelines
Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiable success criteria.