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 Rishi4792/compass --skill review-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Rishi4792/compassWrote 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/rishi4792/compass/review-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rishi4792/compass/review-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rishi4792/compass/review-plan.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 | $0.00088 | $0.05579 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00044 | $0.02789 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.01116 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00558 |
Grade A, and why
review-plan 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 yesterday.
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 — 228 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
compass:review-plan (Review-2 · FULL)
Lens: will this plan, built exactly as written, work — and break nothing else?
Read these before you start. They are the standards this stage is held to, and they
live in plugins/compass/shared/ so they are the same for every stage that uses them:
shared/review-core.md— the severity bug-bar, self-refutation and dedupe rules every review shares.
(A standard nobody loads is not a standard. shared/MANIFEST declares who reads each file and
doctrine-wired-check.sh proves it — feynman.md sat unread for three releases while its own
first line claimed three stages loaded it.)
Step 0a — the cheap checks run FIRST, before any reviewer is spawned
Run bash plugins/compass/scripts/mechanical-suite.sh . and read its output before doing
anything else in this stage.
Why it comes first. The last release ran six independent adversarial reviews and they found 59 recorded defects. 32 of them — just over half — needed no judgment at all: a duplicate constant, a test whose population could be empty, a check nobody called, a shell mistake. A reasoning model was paid to find the fourth copy of a literal. The suite finds that whole class in seconds, for no tokens, and it runs before a reviewer is asked to look at anything.
What to do with it:
- A MEASURED failure blocks this stage. Fix it and re-run. No reviewer should ever be handed a defect a script had already decided.
- Its REPORTED lines are handed to the reviewers as context, not as findings — they are the things the suite could not decide, which is exactly where judgment is worth paying for.
- If a reviewer finds a defect of a class the suite could have caught, ADD THE CLASS to
plugins/compass/scripts/mechanical-suite-classes.mdrather than re-reviewing it forever. That file is the registry; a class in it is a class no future review pays for twice.
Honest limit, stated so nobody over-trusts this. Only some defect classes are soundly mechanical — building this suite found that of five shell-trap classes exactly one could be decided by a line scan without failing on correct code. Every check therefore says whether it MEASURES or REPORTS. A green suite means the cheap classes are clear; it does not mean the work is right.
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.
- yesterday Changed · +25 lines cc5a0779492d
- 7d ago First seen · 203 lines · 88 tokens per session scan A 9a10613d2f7a
review-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository Rishi4792/compass (2 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 88 tokens to every session and 5,579 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
github-pr-review
Handles PR review comments and feedback resolution. Use when user wants to resolve PR comments, handle review feedback, fix review comments, address PR review, check review status, respond to reviewer, verify PR readiness, review PR comments, analyze review feedback, evaluate PR comments, assess review suggestions, or…
github-pr-creation
Creates GitHub Pull Requests with automated validation and task tracking. Use when user wants to create PR, open pull request, submit for review, or check if ready for PR. Analyzes commits, validates task completion, generates Conventional Commits title and description, suggests labels. NOTE - for merging existing…
spec-drift-check
Audits a WP brief for drift against current code — extracts claims, verifies each, emits PROCEED/STOP verdict. Use when starting a new WP, before consuming a spec as binding, or when a doc references paths/lines/functions.
tech-lead
Channel operator (IRC handle @techlead) for the mARC agent team. Compiles chat demands into ready-to-execute work, records them on the GitHub Project board/Issues, and dispatches to specialists (@dev, @sre, @design, @sec, @rev, @research). Invoke with /tech-lead to turn discussion into tracked, delegated tasks.
init
Opt-in onboarding for the mARC agent team. Scaffolds a per-repo team binding so the team graduates from ephemeral session-memory to persistent, versioned config — without ever writing a file silently. Discovers the repo's org/repo/ project at runtime via gh, prefills {{ agentsdir }}/team.toml, and (optionally) a lean…
self-review
Surface the riskiest parts of the current diff so a reviewer knows where to look hardest — one inline pass on small diffs, parallel review lenses with adversarial synthesis on substantial ones. INVOKE PROACTIVELY whenever a change is finished and about to be handed off, reviewed, or shipped. It points attention …