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 supportersimulator/3-surgeons --skill cardio-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/supportersimulator/3-surgeonsWrote 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/supportersimulator/3-surgeons/cardio-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/supportersimulator/3-surgeons/cardio-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/supportersimulator/3-surgeons/cardio-review/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/supportersimulator/3-surgeons/cardio-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/supportersimulator/3-surgeons/cardio-review.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 | $0.00019 | $0.00328 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00164 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00066 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00033 |
Grade A, and why
cardio-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Cardio Review
The Cardiologist (GPT-4.1-mini) provides cross-examination reviews that combine external analysis with neurologist blind-spot detection.
When to Use
- After implementing a significant change (>3 files touched)
- Before merging a feature branch
- When you want an external perspective on an architectural decision
- When git context would help (pass recent changes for targeted review)
How It Works
- Cardiologist analyzes the topic independently
- Neurologist identifies blind spots the cardiologist might miss
- Results are synthesized with any dissent preserved
- Recommendations generated
With Git Context
Pass --git-context to include recent changes:
3s cardio-review "authentication refactor" --git-context "$(git diff HEAD~3)"
The cardiologist will analyze the actual code changes alongside the topic.
Output
cardiologist_findings— external analysisneurologist_blind_spots— what the cardiologist might have missedsynthesis— combined viewdissent— any unresolved disagreements (preserved, not hidden)recommendations— actionable next steps
MCP tool: cardio_review_tool
CLI: 3s cardio-review "topic" [--git-context "changes"]
Cost
~$0.002-0.005 per review (cardiologist API call + neurologist is free).
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 48 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 76c116dfc225
cardio-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository supportersimulator/3-surgeons (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 328 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
gh-pr-review
Automated Cherry Studio review for local branches, PRs, commits, files, architecture docs, and repository skills. Use for code or documentation reviews that need project-specific naming, main/renderer/shared placement and dependency rules, IpcApi and DataApi boundaries, lifecycle/service ownership, renderer hooks…
review-spd
Findings-first code review workflow for AI coding agents. Use when the user asks to review uncommitted changes, commits in a date range, or a branch compared to the main branch / PR-style diff. Focuses on bugs, regressions, correctness risks, missing tests, security/data-safety issues, and other behavior-changing…
karpathy-guidelines
A set of coding guidelines based on observations about common mistakes made by language models. It emphasizes simple solutions, small targeted edits, clear assumptions, and checkable results.
gh-cli
Patterns for invoking the GitHub CLI (gh v2.100.0+) from agents. Use when the task mentions GitHub, gh, pull requests/PRs, issues, releases, gists, Actions/workflow runs, forks, repo cloning, reviews, or you need exact gh commands. Covers pagination, repo targeting, search vs list, discussions, projects, rulesets…
code-review
A single-pass review method for examining a code change, branch, or pull request. A pull request is a proposed change for review before it is merged into a shared codebase.
simplify
Behavior-preserving code simplification — reduce complexity without changing what the code does. Use when the task mentions "simplify", "reduce complexity", "too clever", "hard to read", "reduce nesting", or after a feature lands and the code needs polishing. Oracle analyzes (read-only), light-orchestrator applies the…