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-goalsgit 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-goals)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tomzx/agents/review-goals"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tomzx/agents/review-goals/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-goals"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tomzx/agents/review-goals.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 | $0.00025 | $0.00943 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00377 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00189 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00094 |
Grade A, and why
review-goals 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 — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Goals
Audits a goals document for measurability, ownership, alignment, and focus, so the objectives can reliably guide prioritization.
Prerequisites
- Apply the shared SDLC conventions in
skills/sdlc/references/shared.md. .sdlc/context/goals.md, or a goals document provided in context or as a file path..sdlc/context/project-overview.md(to verify purpose and scope alignment).- Features under
.sdlc/features/(optional, to spot orphaned work that advances no objective).
Steps
- Read the goals document from
.sdlc/context/goals.mdif present, otherwise from context or as a file path. - Cross-reference against the project overview and existing features.
- Identify issues in each category below.
- Report findings. Omit any category that has no findings.
- Write the findings to
.sdlc/context/review-goals.mdwith frontmatterartifact: goals,verdict(approvedif no blocking findings,changes-requestedif the author must address findings,rejectedfor a fundamental flaw), andreviewed_at: <ISO date>, with the findings as the body, perskills/sdlc/references/shared.md. Record any unresolved open questions in the findings body.
Review Checklist
Measurability
- Is every key result tied to a concrete number, ratio, or threshold (not subjective)?
- Is the measurement method specified for each key result and KPI?
- Are key results distinguished from KPIs (time-bound targets vs. ongoing indicators)?
- Where a measurement method is missing, is it flagged as an open question?
Ownership
- Is each objective owned by a named team or person?
- Are KPIs assigned to someone who watches them?
Focus
- Are there three to five key results per objective (not so many that focus dilutes)?
- Are non-goals stated to protect against scope creep?
- Do the objectives cover distinct themes, or do several say the same thing?
Alignment
- Do the objectives follow from the project overview's purpose and scope?
- Are existing features mapped to the objective they advance (the alignment table)?
- Is there orphaned work: a feature advancing no stated objective?
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 705bc639329c
- 23d ago Changed · -4 lines 107f57899c08
- 24d ago Changed 492a973ace52
- 1mo ago First seen · 110 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A f7ebeb4798bf
review-goals is a skill published in the GitHub repository tomzx/agents (13 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 943 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
story-readiness
Checks whether a story is ready to implement: clear acceptance criteria, no open questions, valid ADR and dependencies. Use when the user asks if a story, or the sprint's stories, are ready to start or build.
recipe-create-meet-space
Create a Google Meet meeting space and share the join link.
workthreads
SpecStory Workthreads - a weekly work-thread rollup across a team's repos from SpecStory coding histories (any agent - Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and more). It groups the window's sessions into threads of work per project and labels each new / open / recently closed, so a lead sees what shipped, what is still…
atmos-config
Atmos root configuration: atmos.yaml discovery, precedence, deep merging, basepath, imports, minimal bootstrap, and routing to narrower Atmos skills.
qa-project-bootstrap
Onboard a new QA engineer to an existing codebase, or audit an existing test architecture. Produces a 30-day ramp plan: codebase orientation, framework walkthrough, test architecture audit, mentorship pairing, and first-test guidance. Use when: "QA onboarding," "new tester," "ramp up," "test architecture audit,"…
remove
Remove a deployed framework or addon from the current workspace.