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 tonychen15/xReview --skill xreview-bugfixgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tonychen15/xReviewWrote 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/tonychen15/xreview/xreview-bugfix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tonychen15/xreview/xreview-bugfix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tonychen15/xreview/xreview-bugfix/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/tonychen15/xreview/xreview-bugfix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tonychen15/xreview/xreview-bugfix.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00178 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00089 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00036 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00018 |
Grade A, and why
bugfix scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 10d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Run this command first:
xreview codex bugfix "$ARGUMENTS"
Read the script's output carefully. It tells you the session number and what to append to .review/REVIEW.md.
Then follow these steps:
- Append the session header and "Implementing" line to .review/REVIEW.md (use the exact format from the script output)
- Investigate the bug described in the objective
- If you find a bug: fix it, then run
xreview review - If no bug exists: run
xreview nobugto close the session
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 22 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A ce604cba8720
bugfix is a skill published in the GitHub repository tonychen15/xReview (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 178 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-loop
Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…
semgrep-rule-creator
Creates custom Semgrep rules for detecting security vulnerabilities, bug patterns, and code patterns. Use when writing Semgrep rules or building custom static analysis detections.
variant-analysis
Find similar vulnerabilities and bugs across codebases using pattern-based analysis. Use when hunting bug variants, building CodeQL/Semgrep queries, analyzing security vulnerabilities, or performing systematic code audits after finding an initial issue.
code-review-web
Review web application code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and stack-specific anti-patterns. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review code, debug a production issue, investigate a build failure, audit security, or check a PR before merging. Triggers on code review, review my code, debug…
ln-22-codebase-auditor
Audits cross-cutting code health, security, delivery, and maintainability when no specialist audit is primary. Not for a single delivery review.
vuln-report
Turn one confirmed security finding into a disclosure-ready GitHub advisory with root cause, proof of concept, impact, and source evidence. Use for reporting an established vulnerability, not discovering or validating one.