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-samplegit 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-sample)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/s977043/river-review/architecture-sample"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/architecture-sample.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 | $0.00017 | $0.00496 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00248 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
Sample Architecture Consistency 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 7d 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
Goal / 目的
- ADR/設計ドキュメントの差分から、矛盾・抜け・前提不足を “薄く” 拾うサンプルです。
Non-goals / 扱わないこと
- 実装詳細の断定や、根拠のない推測で断言しない。
False-positive guards / 抑制条件
- 判断材料が不足している場合は、欠陥ではなく質問として扱う。
Rule / ルール
- ADR と本文の整合（決定事項、採用理由、却下案、影響範囲）を確認する。
- 境界（API/データ契約/障害時ふるまい）が曖昧なら指摘する。
- 指摘は差分に紐づけ、ファイル/セクション参照を添える。
Output / 出力
<file>:<line>: <message>形式で 1 行ずつ（日本語、短く）。
評価指標（Evaluation）
- 合格基準: 指摘が差分に紐づき、根拠と次アクションが説明されている。
- 不合格基準: 差分と無関係な指摘、根拠のない断定、抑制条件の無視。
人間に返す条件（Human Handoff）
- 仕様や意図が不明確で解釈が分かれる場合は質問として返す。
- 影響範囲が広い設計判断やトレードオフは人間レビューへ返す。
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 60 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A f31ff398cef0
Sample Architecture Consistency Review is a skill published in the GitHub repository s977043/river-review (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 496 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 2026-08-31.
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…
code-quality-principles
Applies KISS, YAGNI, and SOLID principles for clean code with reduced complexity. Use when refactoring or reviewing code for over-engineering.
aesthetic-instrument
A committed aesthetic in the sense of skills/committed-aesthetic/SKILL.md: every rule below is checkable, and every value was read out of the source — packages/board/public/index.html and greatcto-site/styles.css — rather than chosen to write this document.
committed-aesthetic
How to write — and how to use — a skill that IS one aesthetic rather than a catalogue of them. A catalogue lets an agent pick, and it picks the modal option; a committed aesthetic makes it execute one thing precisely, against rules you can check. Use when a design keeps coming out competent and forgettable, when…
microservices-architecture
Guides service boundary analysis, communication pattern selection, data consistency design, API contract strategy, and resilience checklist for microservices systems. Complements the microservices fragment. Invoked when the user asks to design a microservices system, split a monolith, or review service boundaries.