Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to TEAM-DONGCHIMI/DONGCHIMI-CLIENT. 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/TEAM-DONGCHIMI/DONGCHIMI-CLIENT/develop/.agents/skills/frontend-fundamentals-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TEAM-DONGCHIMI/DONGCHIMI-CLIENTWrote 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/team-dongchimi/dongchimi-client/frontend-fundamentals-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/team-dongchimi/dongchimi-client/frontend-fundamentals-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/team-dongchimi/dongchimi-client/frontend-fundamentals-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/team-dongchimi/dongchimi-client/frontend-fundamentals-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/team-dongchimi/dongchimi-client/frontend-fundamentals-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 | $0.00047 | $0.01377 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00551 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00275 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00138 |
Grade A, and why
frontend-fundamentals-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 2mo 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 144 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A da20262d142d
frontend-fundamentals-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository TEAM-DONGCHIMI/DONGCHIMI-CLIENT (11 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 1,377 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
review-system-design
Review a system design someone else provided - screenshot, drawio, Mermaid, slides, doc, or IaC - by extracting it into a confirmed fact sheet, then scoring it on the nine axes.
codebase-review
Review an entire codebase for architecture, engineering health, and exploitable risk; generate a prioritized remediation plan, an evidence-anchored system knowledge document, or both.
review-ticket
Review a ticket or PR through focused specialist lenses: scope, architecture, security, tests, AC coverage, and PR metadata.
common-feedback-reporter
Pre-write audit for skill violations: checks planned code against loaded skill anti-patterns before any file write. Use when writing Flutter/Dart/TS code or editing SKILL.md files with active project skills. Load as composite; on auto-fixed violation, also load +common/common-learning-log.
common-code-review
Conduct high-quality, persona-driven code reviews. Use when reviewing PRs, critiquing code quality, or analyzing changes for team feedback.
factory-rereview
Re-review a pull request after a push — reconcile the previous review against the new commits, look for new defects the push introduced, then a fresh pass over the whole PR, and finish with a verdict on the PR.