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 saadshahd/moo.md --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saadshahd/moo.mdWrote 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/saadshahd/moo.md/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saadshahd/moo.md/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saadshahd/moo.md/review/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/saadshahd/moo.md/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saadshahd/moo.md/review.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00243 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00097 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00049 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00024 |
Grade A, and why
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 2mo 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
sound:review
What to read
- No argument →
git diff --cached. - A range (e.g.
main..HEAD) → its commits and the wholegit diff <range>.
How to review
The project's taste rules live under .claude/sound/. Read the ones that bear on the code the diff touches, and apply each rule's Detect: and Not-when: verbatim — never from memory. If .claude/sound/ is absent, say so and stop.
Review deeply: surface every rule the changes violate, and the enhancements that genuinely matter for this diff's kind. Ground every finding in the diff and the intent behind it — never rule from the text alone. Stay silent where a rule's Not-when: applies.
Report most-consequential first: - <file>: <rule or enhancement> — <anchor>. If nothing stands, say CLEAN.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 20 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 43df2c70cd66
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository saadshahd/moo.md (38 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 243 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
code-reviewer
Code review knowledge base: quality, security (OWASP Top 10), error-handling, performance, and test-coverage checklists with severity-ranked output format. Use when reviewing code changes, PRs, or before commits. Loaded automatically by the code-reviewer agent.
session-recap
Document Claude Code sessions by extracting knowledge into cross-referenced documentation. Triggers on "recap the session", "summarize the work", or after significant code changes.
knowledge-bank-lookup
Delegates knowledge bank lookups to Explore subagents with reflections-first strategy that learns from past mistakes. Checks /reflections/ directory before documentation to extract documented failures to avoid and proven approaches to apply. Automatically triggers when user mentions services ([project-a], [project-b]…
kb-ingest
Ingest external sources into the knowledge bank through interactive study or quick filing. Two modes — Quick (summarize → file) and Study (theme-by-theme deep dive with online research and personal notes → multi-layer KB output → optional blog/slack synthesis). Triggers on "ingest this", "study this article", "add to…
kb-lint
Health-check the knowledge bank for orphan documents, stale content, broken WikiLinks, index drift, and missing frontmatter. Generates a severity-graded report. Use this skill whenever the user mentions lint, health check, KB maintenance, stale docs, broken links, orphan pages, missing references, knowledge bank…
session-manager
Set the current session's name, project, tags, or summary on its session note. Use when the user names, tags, or summarizes this session, sets its project, or mentions in passing what this session has been about.