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 tobihagemann/turbo --skill review-dependenciesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tobihagemann/turboWrote 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/tobihagemann/turbo/review-dependencies)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tobihagemann/turbo/review-dependencies"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tobihagemann/turbo/review-dependencies/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/tobihagemann/turbo/review-dependencies"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tobihagemann/turbo/review-dependencies.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00071 | $0.01427 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00714 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00285 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00143 |
Grade A, and why
review-dependencies 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 yesterday.
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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Dependencies
Detect package managers and CI action pins, then discover outdated or vulnerable dependencies. Analysis only. Does not upgrade.
Step 1: Detect Package Managers
Identify which package managers are in use by searching for config files:
| Config file | Package manager | Lockfile | Ecosystem |
|---|---|---|---|
package.json |
npm / yarn / pnpm | package-lock.json / yarn.lock / pnpm-lock.yaml |
Node.js |
Package.swift, *.xcodeproj |
Swift Package Manager | Package.resolved |
Swift |
pyproject.toml, requirements.txt, setup.py |
pip / poetry / uv | poetry.lock, uv.lock |
Python |
Cargo.toml |
cargo | Cargo.lock |
Rust |
go.mod |
Go modules | go.sum |
Go |
Gemfile |
Bundler | Gemfile.lock |
Ruby |
pom.xml |
Maven | — | Java |
build.gradle, build.gradle.kts |
Gradle | gradle.lockfile |
Java/Kotlin |
.github/workflows/*.yml / .yaml, action.yml / .yaml |
GitHub Actions | — | CI |
Swift dependencies can live in Package.swift or be configured directly in the Xcode project file (.xcodeproj/.xcworkspace). For Xcode-managed dependencies, inspect the project's package references.
Detection steps:
- Search for config files in the project root and subdirectories (exclude vendored directories)
- If a lockfile exists, use the corresponding package manager variant (e.g.,
yarn.lock→ yarn,pnpm-lock.yaml→ pnpm) - When the repo declares a dependency automation config (
.github/dependabot.yml/.yaml,renovate.json,.github/renovate.json), read it and add every ecosystem it declares to the set found by the config-file search - When the repo has a GitHub remote, list open dependency PRs with
gh pr list --author app/dependabot(orapp/renovate), and mark each upgrade one of them already proposes - If multiple instances of the same package manager found (e.g., monorepo with several
package.jsonfiles): useAskUserQuestionto let the user choose which to review (multiSelect allowed) - If multiple package managers found: use
AskUserQuestionto let the user choose which to review. Exclude the CI ecosystem from that choice and review it alongside whichever the user picks - If none found across every step above: inform user and stop
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.
- yesterday Changed · +5 lines · +22 tokens per session cabb1fa2cda6
- 12d ago First seen · 94 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A b8c58e4a087d
review-dependencies is a skill published in the GitHub repository tobihagemann/turbo (402 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 71 tokens to every session and 1,427 once invoked, about $0.0004 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-ceo-review
CEO/founder-mode plan review. Rethink the problem, find the 10-star product, challenge premises, expand scope when it creates a better product. Three modes: SCOPE EXPANSION (dream big), HOLD SCOPE (maximum rigor), SCOPE REDUCTION (strip to essentials). Originally from Garry Tan's gstack…
master
Turn reference docs into active mastery through retrieval practice, case binding, and scenario simulation. Combines Skycak (learning science) and Chin (expertise acceleration) frameworks. Use when you want to deeply learn material, not just read it.
upskilling-coach
Expert coach for learning, mastering, and upskilling in any domain. Use when the user wants to learn, master, improve, upskill, get better at, or get coached on any topic. Helps build consistent practice habits, identify prerequisites, design efficient learning loops, avoid common pitfalls, maintain discipline, and…
agentic-review
Deep multi-agent code review for local changes. Inspired by AmpCode's agentic review. Use when you want comprehensive analysis of staged changes, unstaged changes, specific commits, or branch differences. Spawns parallel specialized agents (security, performance, patterns, architecture) and synthesizes actionable…
qa
Full QA on all session changes using Codex as a second pair of eyes. Use when user says "QA", "full QA", "QA my changes", "QA all your changes", or "use codex to review". Runs git diff, sends changes to Codex for thorough review, and synthesizes findings.
design-swarm
Orchestrate a team of 10 design agents for holistic UI audit, ideation, and implementation. Use when: "design swarm", "holistic audit", "design review with all lenses", "full design analysis". Modes: audit, ideate, implement (any combination). Targets: screenshots, URLs, file paths, or text briefs.