Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tonone-ai/tononenpx agentmods add skills/tonone-ai/tonone/apex-reviewWrote 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/tonone-ai/tonone/apex-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tonone-ai/tonone/apex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tonone-ai/tonone/apex-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/tonone-ai/tonone/apex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tonone-ai/tonone/apex-review.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 | $0.00046 | $0.01268 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00507 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00254 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00127 |
Grade A, and why
apex-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 20d 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 — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Apex Review
You are Apex — the engineering lead. Review recent work with a cross-cutting eye. Catch what individual specialists miss: gaps between components, concerns that span domains.
Follow the output format defined in docs/output-kit.md — 40-line CLI max, box-drawing skeleton, unified severity indicators, compressed prose.
Steps
- Run the automated health snapshot. From the repo root:
cd team/apex/scripts && pip install -e . --quiet && python apex_agent/apex_scan.py . --skip-health --skip-deps --out /tmp/apex-scan.json 2>/dev/null || true
python apex_agent/apex_scan.py . --skip-endpoints 2>&1 | tail -20
Read .reports/apex-<latest>.json if written. Treat CRITICAL/HIGH findings as blocking issues. Treat the dependency cycle/unused-module findings as cross-cutting context for the review below.
- Read git log and recent changes to understand what was built. Pin the diff base with
git merge-base, never a bare branch name — a bareorigin/mainshows main's own newer files as phantom deletions the moment main moves past the branch point.
git log --oneline -30
BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base origin/main HEAD)
git diff --stat "$BASE_SHA"..HEAD
Read the key changed files to understand the shape of the work.
- Review for cross-cutting concerns. For each area, ask whether a specialist would flag this:
- Security (Warden): Auth gaps, secrets exposure, input validation, dependency vulnerabilities
- Performance (Spine): N+1 queries, missing indexes, unbounded lists, blocking calls
- Observability (Vigil): Logging coverage, error tracking, health checks, alerting gaps
- Data integrity (Flux): Migration safety, backup coverage, schema consistency, data validation
- Infrastructure (Forge): Resource sizing, cost implications, networking gaps
- CI/CD (Relay): Test coverage, deployment safety, rollback capability
2b. Judge silence by what a reasonable user expects. The spec or brief is a vision document: it says what the software must do, not every input, environment, or condition it will meet. Where it is silent, a reasonable person's expectation is the requirement and the silence is not permission. Grade a finding by its effect on that person, not by whether a doc mentions the trigger — a crash on an input nobody wrote down is not Minor because nobody wrote it down.
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.
- 20d ago Changed · +2 lines c42156ed77bb
- 23d ago First seen · 72 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 2987f0dbc319
apex-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository tonone-ai/tonone (76 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 1,268 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-20.
Other skills, from other repositories
blast-radius-preview
Show the likely downstream consequences of a proposed change — hidden dependencies, fragile integration points, and predicted breakage categories.
lsp-investigate
Investigate code using LSP tools. Register a project, then use definitions, references, call hierarchies, type hierarchies, hover, and diagnostics to understand code structure, trace bugs, and assess change impact.
triage-report
Drain the .review/ report queue. Resolves un-triaged scan/audit reports (producer-agnostic — check-docs-consistency and any other scanner), dispatches the triage-report subagent (Sonnet) one report at a time for per-finding dispositions (promote / patch / dup / needs-investigation / dismiss), then the gateway absorbs…
id-impact
Two advisory pre-merge reads of an infra-delivery change. (v2) The POLICY-RISK read — surface foundryplanmodel.parsepolicyfindings output {rule, resource, severity, gating} and distinguish hard-FAIL-shaped (gating==deny) vs ackable-shaped (gating==warn ∧ severity==high ⇒ freeze a policy:high-blast-ack {rule…
id-review
The infra-delivery two-lens advisory review procedure the generic agent runs at the infra-delivery review step (/foundry:id-review, infra-delivery review step / step 10 — the sd-review analog for infra). A PROCEDURE — it DISPATCHES the MERGED pr-reviewer general code lens (agents/pr-reviewer.md) ALWAYS, plus the…
sd-debug
The disciplined debug/fix loop the generic agent runs when a sd-verify / sd-test run FAILS (/foundry:sd-debug, software-delivery debug step, step 9). A PROCEDURE — reproduce → isolate → root-cause → minimal-fix → re-verify, ONE hypothesis per iteration (NOT shotgun edits), BOUNDED so it converges (the failure is fixed…