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 tomzx/agents --skill review-existing-solutionsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tomzx/agentsWrote 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/tomzx/agents/review-existing-solutions)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tomzx/agents/review-existing-solutions"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tomzx/agents/review-existing-solutions/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/tomzx/agents/review-existing-solutions"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tomzx/agents/review-existing-solutions.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 | $0.00032 | $0.01043 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00417 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00209 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
review-existing-solutions scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 22d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Existing Solutions Survey
Audits an existing solutions survey and reports findings across five categories: coverage, evaluation rigor, accuracy, due diligence, and recommendation soundness.
Prerequisites
- Apply the shared SDLC conventions in
skills/sdlc/references/shared.md. - If no argument is provided, locate the feature directory under
.sdlc/features/whose frontmatterissuefield references$ISSUE_NUMBER. .sdlc/features/N-<slug>/existing-solutions.md, or a survey document provided in context or as a file path.sdlc/features/N-<slug>/requirements.md(optional, improves coverage analysis)
Steps
- Read the survey from
.sdlc/features/N-<slug>/existing-solutions.mdif present, otherwise from context or as a file path. - Cross-reference against the requirements document if available.
- Identify issues in each of the five categories below.
- Report findings. Omit any category that has no findings.
- Write the findings to
.sdlc/features/N-<slug>/review-existing-solutions.mdwith frontmatterartifact: existing-solutions,verdict(approvedif there are no blocking findings,changes-requestedif the author must address findings,rejectedfor a fundamental flaw), andreviewed_at: <ISO date>, and the findings as the body, perskills/sdlc/references/shared.md. Record any unresolved open questions in the findings body. For any question that carries meaningful risk, also invoke/create-assumptionto record it formally. For a chosen adopt-or-build direction with lasting consequences, invoke/create-decision.
Review Checklist
Coverage
- Was the internal codebase searched before looking at external options?
- Are the obvious open-source and commercial candidates present, or are well-known options missing?
- Does the survey map candidates back to the functional and non-functional requirements?
Evaluation Rigor
- Is each strong candidate evaluated on strengths, weaknesses, integration effort, cost, and risk?
- Are gaps between a candidate and the requirements stated explicitly?
- Are claims backed by the candidate's docs or source rather than assumption?
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.
- 22d ago Changed · +1 lines 7f4c2e4f84c9
- 24d ago Changed d92432466a18
- 1mo ago First seen · 113 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 0bbf2b3e715c
review-existing-solutions is a skill published in the GitHub repository tomzx/agents (13 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,043 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…