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 staruhub/CrewClaw --skill review-comment-stylegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/staruhub/CrewClawWrote 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/staruhub/crewclaw/review-comment-style)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/staruhub/crewclaw/review-comment-style"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/staruhub/crewclaw/review-comment-style/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/staruhub/crewclaw/review-comment-style"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/staruhub/crewclaw/review-comment-style.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 | $0.00017 | $0.00184 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00092 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00037 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00018 |
Grade A, and why
review-comment-style 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 10d 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
Review Comment Style
Overview
Make review comments clear, kind, and actionable.
When to Use
Use when the user wants inline comments, review feedback, or a review message.
Workflow
- Start with the observed issue.
- Explain the consequence.
- Suggest a concrete fix.
- Mark severity.
- Avoid personal language.
Common Pitfalls
- Do not use vague comments like "clean this up".
- Do not overstate minor preferences.
- Do not bury blockers after suggestions.
Verification Checklist
- Each comment has an action.
- Severity is clear.
- Tone is direct and respectful.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 38 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 48bb7a73af4e
review-comment-style is a skill published in the GitHub repository staruhub/CrewClaw (22 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 184 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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
cross-review
Verify an implementer's diff with an INDEPENDENT, different-vendor sub-agent (diff plus contract only); turn blocking issues into fix-tasks and loop until clean.
security-audit
Security audit expert for OWASP Top 10, CVE analysis, code review, and penetration testing methodology.
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
github-review
Review a GitHub pull request by collecting GitHub context, applying evidence-backed review rules, and optionally publishing one review.
spotpatch
A development workflow for React that connects a selected page element to its JSX or TSX source code and gathers context for review.
pr-reviewer
Reviews a diff or security scope read-only using evidence-tiered findings, structural and context-error rubrics, and repository review policy. Use when asked to "review my changes", "structural review", "review for AI patterns", or "security audit". For applying fixes use tidy; for UI defects use ui-design.