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 agentmods add skills/theam/claude-dev-kit/pr-reviewnpx skills add theam/claude-dev-kit --skill pr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/theam/claude-dev-kitWrote 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/theam/claude-dev-kit/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/theam/claude-dev-kit/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/theam/claude-dev-kit/pr-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00057 | $0.01489 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00745 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00298 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00149 |
Grade A, and why
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 5d 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 — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Review
Produce a high-signal review: findings a reviewer would act on, classified and ordered, ending in a clear verdict. The kit instructions (instructions/secure-coding.md, instructions/testing-standards.md) define what counts as blocking.
Scope the diff
- Reviewing an existing PR: fetch the diff and description from the configured host (
prHostin.claude/dev-kit.json). github:gh pr diff <pr>+gh pr view <pr>. bitbucket:GET /2.0/repositories/{ws}/{repo}/pullrequests/{id}/diffand/pullrequests/{id}(REST, token from env). gitlab:glab mr diff <id>+glab mr view <id>. - Reviewing the working tree (self-review before PR):
git diffagainst the base branch, including staged changes. - Read the linked ticket's acceptance criteria — a diff can be flawless and still not do what the story asked.
- Write the PR intent — one line on what this PR is for and what it deliberately leaves alone. It's the ruler for scope: a real defect inside the intent blocks; a valid concern outside it is a note or a follow-up, not a reason to expand the PR.
Review dimensions (in priority order)
- Acceptance criteria: does the change actually satisfy each criterion? List any criterion not covered.
- Correctness: behavioral regressions, broken edge cases, wrong logic. Read the code, don't skim the diff.
- Contract drift: routes, payloads, enums, schemas, validation, status codes — every side that depends on the contract updated together.
- Security: apply the checklist in
instructions/secure-coding.md(auth on new endpoints, secrets, input validation, data exposure). Any automatic-blocker present is a blocking finding. - Tests (adaptive — judge against the project's own setup, see
instructions/testing-standards.md): when the project has tests, every behavioral change has one that would fail without it and touched files stay at the project's bar (default ≥ 95%, no regression — runcoverage-checkif evidence is missing); when it does e2e, user-facing changes have e2e coverage with edge cases. A project with no test/e2e setup is not a blocking finding — flag it as a recommendation. Test-quality violations frominstructions/testing-standards.md(assertion-free tests, suppressions, deleted/renamed tests) are findings. - Performance regressions introduced here (blocking): algorithmic blowups over collections that grow with usage; N+1 queries or per-item network calls on a request path; unbounded result sets / memory / missing pagination; blocking work on a hot path; a new query filtering/joining on an unindexed column. Not this: micro-optimizations or "could be faster" with no mechanism.
- Duplication introduced by this PR (blocking): new code reimplementing logic already in the repo, or copy-paste between the files this PR adds — fix by reusing/extracting once. Not this: two blocks that merely look alike and are about to diverge; pre-existing duplication is a follow-up at most.
- Accessibility (conditional — evaluate only when the diff changes user-facing UI in a frontend stack: changed components/templates/JSX/HTML/CSS in a node/angular/react/vue-style project. Skip entirely for backend or non-UI diffs — no cost when it doesn't apply). Honors
a11yin.claude/dev-kit.json:auto(default — run on user-facing frontend diffs) ·required(blocking gate) ·off(never run). Check the high-value, low-effort basics on the changed markup only: images have meaningfulalt, form controls have associated labels, interactive elements have an accessible name, keyboard/focus works (no click-only handlers, visible focus), no obvious color-contrast failures, ARIA present where needed and not misused. If the repo already runs a11y tooling (axe-core,eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y, Lighthouse), use its output; never scaffold one. Target WCAG 2.2 level AA, and cite the specific Success Criterion in each finding (e.g. missingalt→ WCAG 1.1.1 (A), low contrast → WCAG 1.4.3 (AA)) so it's verifiable, not vague. Recommendation by default; blocking only whena11y: required. - Maintainability: only issues that materially affect future changes — no style nitpicks a formatter or linter should catch.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 59 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 686218f5370e
pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository theam/claude-dev-kit (11 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,489 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
plan-change
Turns .workflow/ /triage.json and the code into an audited implementation spec at .workflow/ /sdd.json. Use before writing code for a ticket, bug fix or feature.
draft-pr
Writes a PR title and description to .workflow/ /pr.md from the branch's commits, the plan and the recorded verification. Use when opening a PR or asked for a PR description.
frame-product
Turns a feature idea into a product decision - who, which metric, what cost, smallest sellable slice - at .workflow/idea- /frame.md. Use when a feature is proposed with no ticket or agreed scope.
implement-change
Executes an audited plan from .workflow/ /sdd.json, holding the diff to the files it lists, then verifies it into .workflow/ /evidence.md. Use to carry out a plan, after plan-change.
review-diff
Reviews the current diff against the repo's quality preset, reporting findings as file:line with a severity. Use to self-review before a PR, or to review uncommitted or staged changes.
trace-incident
Traces a production symptom to its cause and produces a minimal hotfix plan at .workflow/incident- /sdd.json with a timeline. Use when something is broken in production now.