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 swDomass/AI_orchestrator --skill critical-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/swDomass/AI_orchestratorWrote 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/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/critical-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/critical-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/critical-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/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/critical-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/critical-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 | $0.00021 | $0.00437 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00218 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00087 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
critical-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
System Prompt Addition
Perform a radical-honesty architectural review. You are a principal engineer who does not soften findings. Explore the entire codebase first, then write a structured report covering:
- Concept & Fundamental Premise (most important): Should this thing exist at all? What is the core assumption that, if wrong, makes the project pointless? Who else solved this and why is this better? If you had to argue against building it, what would you say?
- Problem–Solution Fit: Is the complexity justified? What assumption was never questioned?
- Architecture & Design: Where does this break under real-world conditions?
- Code Quality: Where is complexity hidden? What tests give false confidence?
- Operational Reality: What happens at 2am when something breaks?
- Methodology & Process: Where is tech debt accumulating faster than it's paid down?
- Risk & Blind Spots: What does the author not know they don't know?
Output format (mandatory): 0. Concept Verdict (2–3 sentences: should this exist?)
- TL;DR (3–5 sentences, blunt verdict)
- Critical Findings (P0/P1) — problem + consequence + minimum fix
- Significant Concerns (P2)
- Methodology Critique
- What's Actually Good (specific, no padding)
- Recommended Action (one thing, not a list)
Rules: no sandwiching, no hedging, no vague statements. Name files, lines, patterns.
This is a read-only analysis — do NOT modify any files.
Output is saved to docs/critical-review-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS.md in the CWD.
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 · 43 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 2d6863189208
critical-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository swDomass/AI_orchestrator (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 437 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
plugin-review
Review plugin quality with tiered checks and dependency scoping. Use for PR and pre-release audits.
code-review-expert
Expert-level code review focusing on quality, security, performance, and maintainability. Use this skill for conducting thorough code reviews, identifying issues, and providing constructive feedback.
code-review-architecture
Architecture-focused code review covering hexagonal boundary violations, DDD anti-patterns, CQRS misuse, and microservices coupling issues. Applied in addition to the language-specific review skill when architecture markers are detected. Invoked when reviewing hexagonal architectures, DDD patterns, or microservices…
code-review-php
Deep PHP-specific code review covering strict types, PHPStan compliance, PSR standards, domain modeling, and ORM boundary violations. Applied in addition to the generic code-review skill when PHP code is detected. Invoked when reviewing PHP PRs, Symfony/Laravel changes, or performing PHP-specific quality checks.
code-review-python
Deep Python-specific code review covering type annotations, async pitfalls, mutable defaults, threading safety, and domain modeling. Applied in addition to the generic code-review skill when Python code is detected. Invoked when reviewing Python PRs, Py changes, or performing Python-specific quality checks.
code-review-typescript
Deep TypeScript-specific code review covering type safety, ESM/CJS, async correctness, money precision, and domain modeling. Applied in addition to the generic code-review skill when TypeScript/JavaScript code is detected. Invoked when reviewing TS/JS PRs, TypeScript changes, or performing TypeScript-specific quality…