Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server/main/.agents/skills/3-verify-pr-fix/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-serverWrote 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/tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server/3-verify-pr-fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server/3-verify-pr-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server/3-verify-pr-fix/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/tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server/3-verify-pr-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server/3-verify-pr-fix.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 | $0.00077 | $0.03409 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.01364 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00682 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00341 |
Grade A, and why
3-verify-pr-fix scanned grade A with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
curl -s -D /tmp/verify-pr-$PR-headers -X POST http://127.0.0.1:$PORT/mcp \ This is a copy
100% identical to 3-verify-pr-fix — 182 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 201 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify a Candidate PR Actually Fixes the Issue
Goal: take a PR number, check it out cleanly, re-run the same tool call that failed on main, compare the outputs, and produce a verdict — "fixes", "fixes but with concerns", "does not fix", or "cannot run". Pair with /2-repro-issue (which produces the baseline). No edits, no merges, no pushes.
Phase 1 — Resolve the PR and its linked issue
# Accept "498", "#498", or "https://github.com/.../pull/498" — extract the digits only
PR=$(echo "$ARGUMENTS" | sed -E 's|.*/||; s|#||g' | grep -oE '^[0-9]+' | head -1)
[ -z "$PR" ] && { echo "Invalid input: '$ARGUMENTS'. Pass a PR number or URL." >&2; exit 1; }
REPO=stickerdaniel/linkedin-mcp-server
gh pr view $PR --repo $REPO --json title,body,baseRefName,headRefName,headRepositoryOwner,mergeable,mergeStateStatus,additions,deletions,changedFiles,maintainerCanModify,statusCheckRollup
Extract the linked issue number from the PR body (Closes #, Fixes #, Resolves #, or plain #N). Call it ISSUE. If multiple, ask the user which one is the verification target.
Phase 2 — Pick up the baseline + request metadata
/2-repro-issue writes two files for each issue:
/tmp/repro-issue-<ISSUE>-main.json— the on-main response baseline/tmp/repro-issue-<ISSUE>-meta.json— the{tool, arguments}used to call it
Both must exist. The meta file is how this skill replays the exact same call instead of guessing tool and args from the response body.
ls -la /tmp/repro-issue-$ISSUE-main.json /tmp/repro-issue-$ISSUE-meta.json 2>&1
# Both files must exist AND be non-empty. ls alone never fails the script, so
# guard each path before we touch the PR branch or LinkedIn.
[ -s /tmp/repro-issue-$ISSUE-main.json ] || { echo "Missing or empty response baseline. Re-run /2-repro-issue $ISSUE." >&2; exit 1; }
[ -s /tmp/repro-issue-$ISSUE-meta.json ] || { echo "Missing or empty meta file. Re-run /2-repro-issue $ISSUE." >&2; exit 1; }
TOOL=$(jq -r .tool /tmp/repro-issue-$ISSUE-meta.json)
ARGS_JSON=$(jq -c .arguments /tmp/repro-issue-$ISSUE-meta.json)
echo "Replaying: $TOOL($ARGS_JSON)"
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 201 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 156cac8c102f
3-verify-pr-fix is a skill published in the GitHub repository tr4m0ryp/linkedin-mcp-server (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 3,409 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). It is 100% identical to 3-verify-pr-fix, differing in 182 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
make-pr-easy-to-review
Prepare PRs for review by cleaning noisy history, improving PR descriptions, and adding reviewer guidance without changing code behavior. Use for "make this easy to review", "tidy this PR", "clean up commits", or "annotate the diff".
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review
Run an extremely strict maintainability review for abstraction quality, giant files, and spaghetti-condition growth. Use for a thermo-nuclear code quality review, thermonuclear review, deep code quality audit, or especially harsh maintainability review.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
security-review
Perform a focused security review of pending git changes to identify high-confidence security vulnerabilities with real exploitation potential. Use this skill when the user asks for a security review, security audit, vulnerability scan, or wants to check pending changes on a branch for security issues before merging.…
huggingface-llm-trainer
Train or fine-tune language models with TRL or Unsloth on Hugging Face Jobs, including SFT, DPO, GRPO, reward models, and GGUF conversion. Use for cloud LLM training; use huggingface-vision-trainer for vision tasks.