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 suyoumo/ClawProBench --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/suyoumo/ClawProBenchWrote 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/suyoumo/clawprobench/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/suyoumo/clawprobench/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/suyoumo/clawprobench/code-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/suyoumo/clawprobench/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/suyoumo/clawprobench/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 4 findings, 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 Data Exfiltration · line 41 Data is being sent to an external URL. This could be legitimate telemetry or data exfiltration. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Verify the destination URL is trusted and necessary. Remove or replace with documented APIs. Ensure no secrets, tokens, or PII are transmitted.
- medium Data Exfiltration · line 88 Data is being sent to an external URL. This could be legitimate telemetry or data exfiltration. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Verify the destination URL is trusted and necessary. Remove or replace with documented APIs. Ensure no secrets, tokens, or PII are transmitted.
- medium Data Exfiltration · line 190 Data is being sent to an external URL. This could be legitimate telemetry or data exfiltration. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Verify the destination URL is trusted and necessary. Remove or replace with documented APIs. Ensure no secrets, tokens, or PII are transmitted.
- medium Data Exfiltration · line 207 Data is being sent to an external URL. This could be legitimate telemetry or data exfiltration. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Verify the destination URL is trusted and necessary. Remove or replace with documented APIs. Ensure no secrets, tokens, or PII are transmitted.
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 | $0.00057 | $0.02817 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.01127 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00563 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00282 |
Grade A, and why
code-review scanned grade A with 1 finding 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
url=f"https://api.github.com/repos/{owner}/{repo}/contents/{urllib.parse.quote(path, safe='')}?ref={head_sha}", How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 231 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Paranoid Architect Code Review
You are reviewing this change as a paranoid architect. Your job is to find every bug, vulnerability, race condition, edge case, and undocumented assumption before it ships. Assume adversarial users, concurrent access, and Murphy's law.
You handle two input shapes:
- Local changes — uncommitted edits or recent commits in the working tree.
- GitHub pull request —
owner/repo N,owner/repo#N, or agithub.com/.../pull/NURL. If the message contains anything shaped likeowner/repofollowed by a number, treat it as a PR request and use the GitHub path, not git. Exception: if the message also containslocallyorlocal, use the local path instead.
Step 1 — Load the changes
GitHub PR path
Wrap the whole flow in async def and return from it, then FINAL(await review()). FINAL() only records the answer, it does not stop execution; without a return, code after FINAL(...) keeps running and crashes when it tries to use a variable that was never set on an error path.
async def review():
pr_url = f"https://api.github.com/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}"
files_url = f"{pr_url}/files?per_page=100"
# Sequential awaits instead of asyncio.gather — the Monty sandbox
# does NOT reliably capture `import asyncio` into the function
# closure, and the LLM has hit `NameError: name 'asyncio' is not
# defined` when calls cross repl-block boundaries. Three serial
# GETs against api.github.com are fast enough, and this avoids the
# whole class of closure-capture bugs.
meta_r = await http(method="GET", url=pr_url)
diff_r = await http(
method="GET", url=pr_url,
headers=[{"name": "Accept", "value": "application/vnd.github.v3.diff"}],
)
files_r = await http(method="GET", url=files_url)
for r, label in [(meta_r, "metadata"), (diff_r, "diff"), (files_r, "files")]:
if r["status"] != 200:
return (f"GitHub {label} fetch for {owner}/{repo}#{number} "
f"returned HTTP {r['status']}: {r['body']}")
pr = meta_r["body"] # dict: title, state, head, base, user, head.sha, ...
diff = diff_r["body"] # str: unified diff
files = files_r["body"] # list: per-file summaries with patch hunks
head_sha = pr["head"]["sha"] # needed if you post line-level comments later
# ... build the review ...
return body
FINAL(await review())
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 First seen · 231 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 7741d37ba9c8
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository suyoumo/ClawProBench (827 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 2,817 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
Evaluation
Frames model, prompt, and system evaluation as a reproducible experiment with baselines, datasets, and explicit metrics.
open-code-review
Performs AI-powered code review on Git changes using the ocr CLI from alibaba/open-code-review. Use when the user asks to review code, review a pull request, review staged/unstaged changes, review a commit, or compare branches for code quality issues. Produces line-level review comments and can automatically apply…
review-prs
Review a GitHub pull request in the googleapis/mcp-toolbox repo against the team's reviewer checklist: PR title/description conventions, linked issue, logic errors and unhandled edge cases, breaking changes, test coverage, docs updates, security (input handling), and new dependencies. Use whenever a maintainer asks…
harness-creator
Build, audit, and improve harnesses that make AI coding agents reliable: AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md instruction files, feature/state tracking, verification gates, scope boundaries, session handoff, memory persistence, context budgets, tool-permission safety, and multi-agent coordination. Use this whenever a coding agent is…
architecture-review
Review a diff or a branch range for the architecture drift lint cannot see. Run the scoped linters and the parity check first. Then work a checklist keyed to dev/docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: new Api operations or contract shapes without a ruling, new or cut edges between modules, authorization or audit hand-rolled beside the…
github
GitHub operations via gh CLI: issues, PRs, CI runs, code review, API queries. Use when: (1) checking PR status or CI, (2) creating/commenting on issues, (3) listing/filtering PRs or issues, (4) viewing run logs. NOT for: complex web UI interactions requiring manual browser flows (use browser tooling when available)…