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 tech-leads-club/agent-skills --skill the-judgegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tech-leads-club/agent-skillsWrote 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/tech-leads-club/agent-skills/the-judge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tech-leads-club/agent-skills/the-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tech-leads-club/agent-skills/the-judge/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/tech-leads-club/agent-skills/the-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tech-leads-club/agent-skills/the-judge.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 | $0.00192 | $0.04567 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00096 | $0.02284 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00038 | $0.00913 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00457 |
Grade A, and why
the-judge 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 3d 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
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
What ships with it
5 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.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 241 lines · 192 tokens per session scan A 0994ba05d060
the-judge is a skill published in the GitHub repository tech-leads-club/agent-skills (5,161 stars, last pushed yesterday), with no licence file. It adds 192 tokens to every session and 4,567 once invoked, about $0.0010 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 2026-09-09.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-review
Multi-dimensional review of a PR or feature branch in microsoft/win-dev-skills. Activate on "review my PR / changes / branch", "vet before pushing", "PR review", "is this ready to merge". Fans out parallel sub-agents over skill content, the skill-vs-tool boundary (solution hierarchy), tool correctness…
winui-code-review
Code quality review for WinUI 3 apps — MVVM compliance, x:Bind correctness, accessibility, theming, security, and performance. Use before committing to catch issues that the compiler and UI tests won't find.
code-review-and-quality
Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch.
doubt-driven-development
Subjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands. Use when you want every assumption cross-examined before proceeding, when stress-testing a plan for hidden failure modes, when correctness matters more than speed, when working in unfamiliar code, when stakes are high…
code-simplification
Simplifies code for clarity. Use when refactoring code for clarity without changing behavior. Use when code works but is harder to read, maintain, or extend than it should be. Use when reviewing code that has accumulated unnecessary complexity.
golang-refactoring
Golang refactoring — safe, at-scale restructuring of existing Go code: a coverage-adaptive safety net, behavior-preserving transforms (gopls Rename/Extract, gofmt -r, gopatch), the Fowler catalog mapped to Go, breaking import cycles, and small stacked PRs. Apply when a function or type has grown too large, a code…