Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to saffron-health/opencode-gui. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/saffron-health/opencode-gui/main/.agents/skills/get-pr-reviews/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saffron-health/opencode-guiWrote 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/saffron-health/opencode-gui/get-pr-reviews)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saffron-health/opencode-gui/get-pr-reviews"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saffron-health/opencode-gui/get-pr-reviews/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/saffron-health/opencode-gui/get-pr-reviews"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saffron-health/opencode-gui/get-pr-reviews.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 | $0.00024 | $0.00591 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00236 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00118 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
get-pr-reviews 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to get-pr-reviews — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Get nicely formatted review comments for a pull request, grouped by file and line with proper comment threading.
Steps
-
Determine PR number: If not provided, look up the associated PR for the current branch using:
gh pr view --json number --jq '.number' -
Get formatted review comments: Use the GitHub API to fetch and format all line-specific review comments:
gh api repos/:owner/:repo/pulls/{PR_NUMBER}/comments --jq ' group_by(.path, .line) | map({ path: .[0].path, line: .[0].line, comments: sort_by(.created_at) }) | sort_by(.path, .line) | map( "**\(.path)**\n Line \(.line):" + (.comments | map( if .in_reply_to_id then " | \(.user.login): \(.body)" else " (\(.user.login)): \(.body)" end ) | join("\n")) + "\n" ) | join("\n") '
Output Format
The formatted command produces output like:
**apps/api/src/handlers/optionsHandlers.ts**
Line 98: (tanishqkancharla): I think this is a bug. If you search for e.g. "blue cros", none of these search conditions will match.
| tanishqkancharla: I see that you re-query all insurances below, so this doesn't get used.
| Mochael: I think we should ditch the ilikes and just use the fuzzy search applied to planName, payer name and abbreviation
| tanishqkancharla: default to fuzzy search
**apps/api/src/handlers/optionsHandlers.ts**
Line 116: (tanishqkancharla): fyi: don't need to fix, but I think you can just do `query.where(and(...conditions, or(...searchConditions)))`
Key Features
- Grouped by file and line: Comments are organized by their location in the code
- Threaded conversations: Replies are indented with
|to show the conversation flow - Chronological order: Comments within each thread are sorted by creation time
- User attribution: Each comment shows the GitHub username of the author
Usage Example
# Get formatted review for PR #84
gh api repos/saffron-health/monorepo/pulls/84/comments --jq '...'
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 · 70 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 90ca15172448
get-pr-reviews is a skill published in the GitHub repository saffron-health/opencode-gui (58 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 591 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to get-pr-reviews, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…