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 scharissis/polako --skill review-healthgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/scharissis/polakoWrote 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/scharissis/polako/review-health)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/scharissis/polako/review-health"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/scharissis/polako/review-health/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/scharissis/polako/review-health"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/scharissis/polako/review-health.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 | $0.00000 | $0.04089 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.02044 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00818 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00409 |
Grade A, and why
review-health 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 8d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 310 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Audit the health of $repo
The repository to read: $repo — resolved as a path, and if it is empty, the repository the session is already in. Unlike a vision document there is no wrong guess to make here: the repo in front of you is the subject.
Focus, if one was given: $focus
What this run may do, and what it may not
It reads a repository and files proposals: issues carrying the proposed
label, which no unattended run will ever pick up. A human takes that label off,
and that act — not this run — is what queues work.
So the whole of the write surface is creating labelled issues. This run does not commit, push, open pull requests, alter existing issues or comments, or touch a line of code. If something here seems to call for one of those, the answer is that it belongs in a proposal for a human to approve, not in this run. The blast radius of a fully subverted health run is spam sitting behind a label, and it stays that way.
The whole of the gh surface this run may use, today, is three call shapes:
the two issue list reads in Phase 0, and the one issue create in Phase 5 —
the last of which may carry --parent and --blocked-by, and no other write
flag. Nothing else, including anything that looks like diligence rather than a
write: do not run gh label list to confirm the proposed label exists, or
gh --version, or any other pre-flight probe. Assume the label exists — it is
the label this skill mints every issue with. No shipped skill is granted a
wider gh surface, so a call outside those three shapes raises a permission
prompt nobody is there to answer under an unattended run, and the run hangs
instead of reporting. Improvising one, however reasonable it looks, is worse
than skipping a check that was never asked for.
It does its own measuring
This is the part that must not be got wrong, so it is stated before the method:
the skill measures the repository itself, and depends on no external report.
A repo may carry its own health script — polako has scripts/health.sh — but
that script measures one language in one layout and serves one project's CI. A
skill that leaned on it would work on exactly one repository.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 310 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 135ac92df688
review-health is a skill published in the GitHub repository scharissis/polako (1 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 4,089 tokens. 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
linear-workspace
Linear issue management — routes work to specialized agents and slash commands. Use when: creating, updating, searching, bulk-editing, cleaning up, syncing Linear. TRIGGERS: "linear", "ticket", "issue", "create issue", "update issue", "search issues", "my issues", "bulk", "cleanup", "sync", "log bug", "file issue"…
legion
Iterative Swarm Loop — Submit a holistic project description, get a company team that keeps sprinting until everything is built. Combines autonomous looping with Hydra-scale parallel swarms. Requires CLAUDECODEEXPERIMENTALAGENTTEAMS=1.
beads-schema
Beads (bd CLI) reference — issue types, statuses, priorities, dependencies, and common commands.
gitlab-discussion
GitLab discussion operations via API. ALWAYS use this skill when user wants to: (1) view threaded discussions on MRs/issues, (2) create new discussion threads, (3) reply to discussions, (4) resolve/unresolve discussions.
gitlab-group
GitLab group operations via API. ALWAYS use this skill when user wants to: (1) list/view groups, (2) create/update/delete groups, (3) manage group members, (4) list subgroups or group projects, (5) share projects with groups.
gitlab-mr
GitLab merge request operations. ALWAYS use this skill when user wants to: (1) list merge requests, (2) view MR details, (3) create new MRs, (4) approve/merge MRs, (5) checkout MR branches, (6) add notes/comments, (7) rebase MRs.