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 s977043/river-review --skill architecture-diagramsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/s977043/river-reviewWrote 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/s977043/river-review/architecture-diagrams)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/s977043/river-review/architecture-diagrams"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/architecture-diagrams/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/s977043/river-review/architecture-diagrams"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/architecture-diagrams.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 | $0.00027 | $0.01325 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00662 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00265 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00133 |
Grade A, and why
Architecture Diagrams Readiness 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 8d 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
Pattern declaration
Primary pattern: Reviewer Secondary patterns: Inversion Why: アーキテクチャ図の差分から読み手の誤解を招く要因（スコープ不明・矛盾・ラベル不足）を検出する。
Goal / 目的
- 図（C4/シーケンス/データフロー等）の差分から、読み手が迷う要因（スコープ不明、境界不明、矛盾、ラベル不足）を減らし、実装・運用に落ちる状態にする。
Non-goals / 扱わないこと
- 図の美的センスやツール選定の議論。
- 実装詳細（クラス設計、コード構造）のレビュー。
Pre-execution Gate / 実行前ゲート
このスキルは以下の条件がすべて満たされない限りNO_REVIEWを返す。
- 差分に図関連ファイル（
*diagram*,*c4*,*sequence*,*flow*,*.png,*.svg）またはアーキテクチャドキュメントが含まれている - 差分に図の構成要素（コンポーネント・矢印・境界・ラベル・フロー）の追加・変更が含まれている
- inputContextに
diffが含まれている
ゲート不成立時の出力: NO_REVIEW: architecture-diagrams — 図関連ファイルの変更なし
False-positive guards / 抑制条件
- 図が “参考図” と明記され、本文が契約の真実の源泉になっている場合は、図への要求強度を下げる。
Rule / ルール
- 先頭に要約を 1 行出す（追加/変更された図と伝えたい決定事項の要点）。
- 指摘は最大 8 件まで。誤解につながる点（矛盾、スコープ不明、境界不明、責任不明）を優先。
- 可能なら “追記案” を付ける（図のキャプション/凡例/本文追記など）。
Checklist / 観点チェックリスト
- スコープと前提
- 図の対象範囲（どのサービス/境界まで含むか）が明確か。
- 前提（運用対象/PoC、同期/非同期、テナント/リージョン等）が明示されているか。
- 境界と責務
- 境界（サービス/モジュール/チーム）と責務のラベルがあるか。
- 外部システム/第三者依存が明示されているか。
- データフロー/制御フロー
- 矢印の向きと意味（request/response、publish/subscribe、read/write）が曖昧でないか。
- 重要データ（PII 等）を扱う場合、データの流れと保存先が読み取れるか。
- 失敗時の扱い（最低限）
- タイムアウト/リトライ/冪等性など、境界を跨ぐ前提が必要な箇所が読み取れるか。
- 本文/ADR との整合
- 本文の説明や ADR の決定事項と矛盾していないか（命名、責務、依存、契約）。
Output / 出力フォーマット
すべて日本語。<file>:<line>: <message> 形式で出力する。
- 先頭に要約を 1 行:
(summary):1: <図の要点と未決> - 以降は指摘（最大 8 件）:
<message>に[severity=critical|major|minor|info]を含める。- 可能なら “追記案” を 1 行付ける（例:
図キャプションにスコープと凡例を追加）。
評価指標（Evaluation）
- 合格基準: 差分に紐づく図の曖昧さ/矛盾を優先度付きで指摘し、追記案がある。
- 不合格基準: 図の内容と無関係な一般論、根拠のない断定、指摘過多。
人間に返す条件（Human Handoff）
- 図が示す設計判断そのものが未合意（複数案が併存）な場合は人間の設計レビューへ返す。
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 99 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 9870a1c95044
Architecture Diagrams Readiness is a skill published in the GitHub repository s977043/river-review (3 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 1,325 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-all
Multi-agent code review for diffs (project-agnostic). Covers standards, bugs, security, DRY, smells, perf, tests, API contracts, a11y/i18n. Verifies each finding to eliminate false positives. Use for /review-all, pre-PR/pre-commit review, or auditing uncommitted/staged changes.
punchcard
Architecture-level design review of a code change: module boundaries, dependency direction, data model, error paths, cost of the next change — never naming, formatting, or anything a linter catches. Use when the user invokes /punchcard, says 'punchcard review', or asks for any design, architecture, or structural…
kroki-diagrams
Create clean, readable diagrams using Kroki with a use-case-first selector. Use when the user wants repository-local diagrams for architecture, runtime topology, request flows, dependency graphs, schemas, planning structures, or tree-like repository layouts from code, docs, or natural-language descriptions. Prefer…
architecture-diagram-creator
Create effective architecture diagrams following established diagramming standards (UML, C4, ArchiMate) with proper visual elements and presentation techniques. Use this skill whenever the user needs to create, review, or improve architecture diagrams, wants guidance on which diagramming standard to use, needs help…
arch4-mcp
Use Arch4 MCP tools to create, update, build, and visualize repository architecture maps.
code-quality-principles
Applies KISS, YAGNI, and SOLID principles for clean code with reduced complexity. Use when refactoring or reviewing code for over-engineering.