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 gh-address-commentsgit 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/gh-address-comments)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/s977043/river-review/gh-address-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/gh-address-comments/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/gh-address-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/gh-address-comments.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 | $0.00042 | $0.01106 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00553 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00111 |
Grade A, and why
GitHubレビューコメント対応（修正案つき） 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 6d 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: レビューコメントの整理・対応方針作成がチェックリスト型の主タスクだが、レビューコメントが存在しない場合は実行不要
Goal / 目的
- レビューコメントを must/want/nit に整理し、未対応を解消するための最小の修正方針と返信案を用意する。
- 情報不足の箇所は仮対応せず、追加質問として明示する。
Non-goals / 扱わないこと
- 要求の背景が不明なまま大規模リファクタを提案しない。
- 既に解決済み・outdated なコメントに対する重複指摘を避ける。
- プロダクト要求の意思決定を独断で覆さない。根拠がない反論はしない。
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。
- PRにレビューコメント（未対応または要確認）が存在する
- inputContextにdiffが含まれている
ゲート不成立時の出力: NO_REVIEW: gh-address-comments — 対応すべきレビューコメントが検出されない
False-positive guards / 抑制条件
- コメントが差分に紐づかない、または文脈不足で判断できない場合は質問に倒す。
- 単なる表記ゆれや好みの指摘は
nitとし、主要な品質・安全性の指摘を優先。
Rule / 手順
- コメントの棚卸し
- 取得コメントを ID 連番で一覧化（種類、ファイル/行、原文、スレッド状態）。
- severity を must/want/nit から、status を 対応済み/未対応/要確認 から付与。
- 未対応・要確認への対応案
- 影響範囲とリスク（互換性、セキュリティ、性能）を簡潔に述べる。
- 修正方針または最小パッチ案を出す。根拠として差分や仕様を引用する。
- 代替案があれば 1 行で併記。
- 質問・確認事項
- 事実確認が必要な点は具体的に質問化し、ブロッカーを明示。
- 対応済みの返信案
- 対応内容を要約し、丁寧な返信文案を日本語で記す。
- 総括
- 件数集計（総数/未対応/要確認/対応済み）。不足ログや取得漏れリスクがあれば書く。
Output / 出力
- すべて日本語。
<file>:<line>: <message>形式。場所不明は(summary):1:や(comment C1):1:を使う。 <message>には[severity=must|want|nit][status=未対応|要確認|対応済み]を含め、方針/修正案/質問/返信案を短く書く。- パッチ案は概要レベルで示し、必要なら対象ファイル名と関数名を添える（長文パッチは禁止）。
評価指標（Evaluation）
- 合格: コメントが網羅され、重要度付きで未対応が減る具体方針と質問が提示されている。
- 不合格: 差分と無関係な一般論、根拠のない反論、outdated への重複指摘。
人間に返す条件（Human Handoff）
- 仕様や優先度が不明で対応方針が決まらない場合。
- 破壊的変更や大規模リファクタが必要な場合は、合意形成のため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.
- 6d ago First seen · 94 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A a2a8dfa7ea89
GitHubレビューコメント対応（修正案つき） is a skill published in the GitHub repository s977043/river-review (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 1,106 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
omnicheck-github
Use when checking if PR review findings have been applied — verifies both OmniForge-generated and human reviewer comments against the current diff, posts nudge replies on unaddressed threads.
omnicreate-gitlab
Use when creating a GitLab merge request (OmniForge). Auto-populates title and description from commits, supports draft MRs, labels, assignees, reviewers, and issue linking.
open-pr
Use this skill to submit the commits on the current branch as one pull request against a GitHub repository. Push the branch, open the PR with an imperative title and a body that names what changed and why, and post a follow-up ping only when CODEOWNERS resolves to one person. One branch per run, one pull request per…
omnicreate-github
Use when creating a GitHub pull request (OmniForge). Auto-populates title and description from commits, supports draft PRs, labels, assignees, reviewers, and issue linking.
pr-lifecycle
Full PR lifecycle management: list, analyze, validate, and merge pull requests. Auto-detects validation gates per package and integrates a code-review pass for code analysis. Use when: managing PRs, checking PR status, reviewing open PRs, merging PRs, triaging PRs, cleaning up stale PRs, validating PR readiness, or…
omnifix-github
Use when fixing review findings on a GitHub PR, resolving inline review threads, applying code review suggestions, or when asked to fix issues from an OmniForge report.