Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to TsukumoHQ/trovex. 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/TsukumoHQ/trovex/main/.claude/skills/review-frontend/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TsukumoHQ/trovexWrote 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/tsukumohq/trovex/review-frontend)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tsukumohq/trovex/review-frontend"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tsukumohq/trovex/review-frontend/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/tsukumohq/trovex/review-frontend"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tsukumohq/trovex/review-frontend.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 | $0.00000 | $0.02855 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01142 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00571 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00285 |
Grade A, and why
review-frontend 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 2mo 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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed AGPL-3.0
The repository is licensed AGPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 64 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 90fba68bd9fd
review-frontend is a skill published in the GitHub repository TsukumoHQ/trovex (11 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed AGPL-3.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,855 tokens. 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
coding-assistant
Help users write, review, and debug code.
audit
Enforces Law 4 (Verify Before Reporting) of the 7 Laws of AI Agent Discipline. Audits a window of recent commits for real defects, confirms each finding before touching code so false positives die first, and checks every surface a change touches — so 'looks done' is never mistaken for 'is correct'.
simplicity-review
Enforces Law 4 (Verify Before Reporting) of the 7 Laws of AI Agent Discipline. Reviews the current diff for over-engineering (code that could reuse an existing file, a stdlib or native feature, or fewer lines) and reports trim findings without touching code, so 'it works' is never mistaken for 'it is the minimum that…
requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements.
receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation.
triage
Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles, categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.