Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to stbenjam/skillsaw. 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/stbenjam/skillsaw/main/.agents/skills/skillsaw-review-panel/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/stbenjam/skillsawWrote 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/stbenjam/skillsaw/skillsaw-review-panel)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/stbenjam/skillsaw/skillsaw-review-panel"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stbenjam/skillsaw/skillsaw-review-panel/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/stbenjam/skillsaw/skillsaw-review-panel"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stbenjam/skillsaw/skillsaw-review-panel.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 74 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00066 | $0.02713 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00033 | $0.01357 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00543 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00271 |
Grade A, and why
skillsaw-review-panel 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 12d 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 — 270 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Panel — Multi-Specialist Review
Read-only review — never modify files, never push to any remote.
Run 7 specialist reviewers + 1 arbiter to review a skillsaw PR.
Two execution modes:
- Parallel (default): Each specialist runs as a dedicated sub-agent concurrently, exploring the codebase through its own lens without bias from the others.
- Serial (
--serial): Specialists run inline, one after another. Cheaper — codebase context is derived once and shared — but later specialists see earlier ones' file reads, which can bias them.
Keep the panel advisory. It does not gate merge. It surfaces findings; the maintainer and PR author review and decide ship.
Arguments
/skillsaw-review-panel [--serial] [<pr number>]
| Argument | Description |
|---|---|
--serial |
Run all specialists inline instead of as parallel sub-agents |
<pr number> |
GitHub PR number. Optional — defaults to current branch |
Specialist Roster
| Specialist | Lens | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture Reviewer | Check module boundaries, abstraction level, SOLID, cross-file impact, error propagation | references/architecture.md |
| Python Expert | Review idiomatic Python, type hints, performance, stdlib usage, packaging conventions | references/python-expert.md |
| Security & Supply Chain Reviewer | Check injection, credential handling, dependency trust, lockfile integrity, build pipeline | references/security-supply-chain.md |
| QA Engineer | Test coverage gaps, untested error paths, edge cases, concrete test suggestions | references/qa-engineer.md |
| Technical Writer | Verify documentation accuracy, completeness, consistency with code changes, CLAUDE.md drift | references/technical-writer.md |
| Ecosystem Reviewer | Review target-tool adoption in the current LLM landscape; core-vs-plugin scope boundary | references/ecosystem.md |
| Slopinator Reviewer | Catch review-history residue in code comments and AI-authored prose tells in docs, docstrings, and commit messages | references/slopinator.md |
| Panel Arbiter | Handle strategic synthesis, disagreement resolution, final disposition | (inline, below) |
What ships with it
9 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.
- references/architecture.md 1011 B
- references/ecosystem.md 2.8 KB
- references/python-expert.md 1.1 KB
- references/qa-engineer.md 1.3 KB
- references/security-supply-chain.md 1.3 KB
- references/serial-mode.md 944 B
- references/slopinator.md 9.9 KB
- references/technical-writer.md 1.7 KB
- verdict-template.md 1.3 KB
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 270 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A 806745c8eb6a
skillsaw-review-panel is a skill published in the GitHub repository stbenjam/skillsaw (66 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 2,713 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…