Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Terry-Mao/AICodingFlow. 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/Terry-Mao/AICodingFlow/main/.github/skills/update-pr-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Terry-Mao/AICodingFlowWrote 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/terry-mao/aicodingflow/update-pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/terry-mao/aicodingflow/update-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/terry-mao/aicodingflow/update-pr-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/terry-mao/aicodingflow/update-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/terry-mao/aicodingflow/update-pr-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 5 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 Agent Snooping · line 33 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
- medium Agent Snooping · line 97 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
- medium Agent Snooping · line 98 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
- medium Agent Snooping · line 111 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
- medium Agent Snooping · line 112 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
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 | $0.00031 | $0.00927 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00371 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00185 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
update-pr-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 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.
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 125 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
update-pr-review
Use this skill to turn human feedback on bot PR reviews into concise updates to repo-local review companion skills.
This skill owns only the self-evolution logic: how to turn aggregated human
feedback into local review guidance. The GitHub Actions runner owns data
collection, write-surface validation, commits, pushes, and PR creation.
When run inside GitHub Actions, .agents may be read-only. Write proposed
changes only to update-pr-review-output/; the runner applies them.
Workflow
- Read the aggregated feedback JSON provided by the runner.
- Identify repeated human-feedback patterns or stable repo preferences.
- Convert those patterns into concise repo-specific guidance.
- Write proposed local companion skill content to
update-pr-review-output/. - Stop; the runner validates and publishes the result.
Output Contract
Always write update-pr-review-output/status.json:
{
"status": "changed",
"reason": "Brief evidence summary.",
"updated_files": [".github/skills/review-pr-repo/SKILL.md"]
}
Allowed statuses:
changedwhen guidance should be updatedno_changewhen evidence is insufficient or already coverederrorwhen feedback cannot be interpreted safely
Use no_change when there is no human evidence. Agent-only feedback is not
enough to update guidance.
For changed, write the complete replacement content for each updated file:
update-pr-review-output/review-pr-repo/SKILL.mdupdate-pr-review-output/review-spec-repo/SKILL.md
Do not edit .agents directly.
Learn And Edit
Read the JSON and look for patterns worth adding to local review rules:
- humans clearly said an agent comment was wrong
- the finding was directionally right, but severity, scope, or line target was wrong
- the comment was not actionable
- reviewers repeatedly emphasized a repo-specific check
- human-only review threads reveal stable repo preferences
- a pattern belongs in the top-level summary instead of inline comments
What ships with it
3 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 125 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A d2ba501cdaae
update-pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Terry-Mao/AICodingFlow (169 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 927 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…