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 sflandergan/agentic-coding --skill github-pr-commentsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sflandergan/agentic-codingWrote 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/sflandergan/agentic-coding/github-pr-comments)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sflandergan/agentic-coding/github-pr-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sflandergan/agentic-coding/github-pr-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/sflandergan/agentic-coding/github-pr-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sflandergan/agentic-coding/github-pr-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 | $0.00024 | $0.00947 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00379 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00189 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00095 |
Grade A, and why
github-pr-comments 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 1mo 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 — 87 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
GitHub PR Comments
Use this for solo-maintainer PR review workflows where feedback is stored as plain GitHub comments rather than formal review submissions.
Skill Scope
This skill owns PR comment mechanics: fetching comments, distinguishing conversation comments from inline review threads, obtaining exact reply targets, and posting approved replies through project scripts.
This skill does not own role-level review orchestration. The calling review agent decides how to interpret comments, validate technical claims, combine them with other findings, suggest fixes, edit files, dispatch implementers, or perform final self-review.
Read Comments
Run the bundled read-only helper before proposing fixes. It fetches top-level conversation comments and unresolved inline review threads:
bash .agents/skills/github-pr-comments/scripts/fetch-pr-comments.sh [<pr>]
When <pr> is omitted, the script auto-detects the PR number from the current branch.
Run the command exactly as shown, without quoting the script path.
The default output is one filtered view: a three-line header, then every conversation comment with its full body, then every unresolved inline thread with a path:line anchor and the full body of each note in the thread.
Each thread header line carries the thread_id that the reply script expects, so identifying a reply target needs no second call and no raw JSON.
The default view does not include the diff.
Read the referenced code through the printed path:line anchors against the local checkout, with git diff and git show.
An anchor marked (outdated) is the thread's original diff location, not a line in the current checkout.
Locate the referenced logic by path and comment context.
When it is absent from the current file, inspect that file's history with git log -- <path> and git show <revision>:<path>.
Optional read-only modes:
--all— additionally include resolved inline threads, each marked[resolved]on its header line.--diff-only— print the PR diff, for when the PR branch is not checked out locally.--json— the unfiltered{ pr, conversationComments, threads }payload. This is a last resort, for when the filtered view drops a field you need or when you are debugging the helper itself. Use the default view for normal review work.
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed 4c41e2278e90
- 1mo ago First seen · 87 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 3669e0b474ed
github-pr-comments is a skill published in the GitHub repository sflandergan/agentic-coding (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 947 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…