review-bugbot

review-bugbot is a skill for Cursor from saski/arnesto. It costs 14 tokens per session (1,533 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of review-security, Unlicense.

A code-review workflow that asks a Bugbot assistant to inspect the changes in a repository.

In plain words
What is it for?
It is for checking a branch or pull request for potential code problems.
Why use it?
It removes the need to manually prepare the change set before requesting an automated review.

Skill for Cursor

Written for Cursor: installed under .cursor/. Also seen: mentions subagents.

Good fit It is for checking a branch or pull request for potential code problems.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/saski/arnesto/review-bugbot
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add saski/arnesto --skill review-bugbot
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saski/arnesto

Made for: Cursor.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-bugbot

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saski/arnesto/review-bugbot/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/saski/arnesto/review-bugbot)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saski/arnesto/review-bugbot"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saski/arnesto/review-bugbot/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-bugbot

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saski/arnesto/review-bugbot"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saski/arnesto/review-bugbot.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 14 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,533 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin 86% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00014 $0.01533
Opus 5.5 $0.00006 $0.00613
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00003 $0.00307
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00153

Measured 11d ago against content hash f973e379435c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-bugbot 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 11d 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.

Origin

This is a copy

86% identical to review-security — 57 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.

.cursor/skills-cursor/review-bugbot/SKILL.md · 85 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 85 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Review Bugbot

Use this skill when the user asks to run /review-bugbot.

Before launching, decide which path you are on.

Review the diff yourself, in this same turn, and do not launch a subagent, when either of these is true:

  • bugbot is not an available subagent type. It is available only when the Task or Subagent tool is offered and its subagent_type enum includes bugbot. If that tool is not offered, bugbot is not available.
  • This run is already the Bugbot reviewer when the task description is Bugbot, or when the prompt you are carrying out has the Bugbot review shape: a Full Repository Path: line whose value is an absolute repository path, and a Diff: line whose value is branch changes, uncommitted changes, or natural language.

When you review in place:

  • Compute the diff the same way the review subagent would. Use branch changes unless the user asked for uncommitted changes only. If your prompt already has the Bugbot review shape, review that diff.
  • Do not call Task or Subagent.
  • If bugbot is unavailable and this run is not already the Bugbot reviewer, say "Bugbot is unavailable; I reviewed the diff in place." Attribute these findings to the in-place review, not to a Bugbot run.
  • Return the findings yourself. If there is no diff, say so in one sentence. If there are no issues, say "In-place review found no issues". If there are issues, print a compact markdown table with one row per finding, sorted by severity (highest first), using exactly these columns: Severity, Location (file:line), Finding. Put the file and line in the location column as file:line.

Launch a subagent only when bugbot is an available subagent type and this run is not already the Bugbot reviewer.

Launch exactly one bugbot subagent with:

  • run_in_background: false unless explicitly asked to run in background
  • description: "Bugbot"
  • subagent_type: "bugbot"

When you launch the subagent, it computes the local diff from the repository path, so do not compute the diff yourself before launching it. Set Full Repository Path to the absolute path of the git repository that contains the changes the user wants reviewed. That repository may be a subfolder of the current workspace. Do not change the agent's workspace root or call move_agent_to_root to review a repository that is already reachable.

By default, the review subagent infers the repository's actual base branch, such as main, when computing branch changes. In most cases, do not provide Base Branch. Only provide it if you know the current branch or PR should be compared against a specific branch other than the repository's default base branch, such as when you created the current branch from another branch.

Special case: if the user explicitly asks to review a specific PR or branch, make sure that target is checked out before launching the subagent:

  • Examples include github.com/... /review, review {link}, or review {branch-name}.
  • Resolve the provided PR link, PR number, or branch name to the PR head branch or named branch.
  • Check whether the target branch is already the currently checked out local branch. If it is, continue.
  • If a different branch is currently checked out, try to switch to the target branch.
  • If Git refuses to switch because local files would be overwritten, conflicts need resolution, or another checkout blocker occurs, explain the blocker and ask whether the user wants to stash local changes before retrying.
  • Only stash after the user confirms. If the stash succeeds, retry switching to the target branch.
  • Launch the review subagent only after the target branch is checked out locally.

Use this exact prompt shape:

Full Repository Path: <absolute repository path>
Diff: <one of: "branch changes", "uncommitted changes", "natural language">
Base Branch: <only include this line when reviewing branch changes against a known specific base branch>
Change Description: <required only when Diff is "natural language"; list each changed file and what changed in it>
Custom Instructions: <only include this line when the user gave specific review instructions>

Read the full file on GitHub · 85 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 11d ago Changed · +18 lines f973e379435c
  2. 1mo ago First seen · 67 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 24bb0b368445

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-bugbot is a skill published in the GitHub repository saski/arnesto (6 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Unlicense. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 1,533 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to review-security, differing in 57 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

readonly-review

Run a no-network read-only review practice with two explorer steps and one synthesis step.

Ranvier-Technologies/pixir · 20 tokens

repo-contracts-and-boundaries

Use when turning architecture, layering, ownership, dependency direction, schemas, structural metrics, quality thresholds, baselines, allowlists, or generated quality snapshots into repository checks.

yfge/agent-harness-skills · 41 tokens

address-pr-comments

Work through the review comments on a pull request: check each point against the code, make the changes that are right, answer the ones that are not, and hold every reply for approval before it is posted.

androoAGI/starnet · 46 tokens

code-refiner

Deep code simplification and refactoring preserving behavior across Python, Go, TypeScript, Rust. Targets complexity, anti-patterns, readability debt. Triggers on: "simplify this code", "refactor for clarity", "reduce complexity", "make this more readable", "tech debt cleanup", "too much nesting". NOT for deepening…

Mathews-Tom/armory · 91 tokens

package-optimizer

Evaluate one existing package or bounded package family from recorded evaluator evidence and a capability profile, then propose retain, simplify, strengthen, retire, or inconclusive without editing. Use when optimizing a skill, agent, hook, rule, command, utility, or preset; evaluating whether package detail is…

Mathews-Tom/armory · 119 tokens

review-skill

Review a proposed Agent Skill for structural validity and content quality before publishing. Runs the skill-validator CLI to check for structural issues, scores the skill with an LLM judge, and interprets results to advise authors on what to address. Use when a user wants to review, validate, or quality-check an Agent…

agent-ecosystem/skill-validator · 67 tokens