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 tufantunc/review-pro --skill review-pro-synthesizegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tufantunc/review-proWrote 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/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro-synthesize)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro-synthesize"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro-synthesize/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/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro-synthesize"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro-synthesize.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 | $0.00045 | $0.06130 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.02452 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.01226 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00613 |
Grade A, and why
review-pro-synthesize 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 26d 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 — 278 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review-Pro Synthesis (Stage 3)
You are the orchestrator's final stage. You receive the structured findings from all dispatched reviewers, plus diff_class, changed_files, spec_source, external_premises, premises_dropped, repository_rules, rules_dropped, stack_signals, and each dispatched reviewer's context.changed_files from triage's dispatch plan, and produce ONE unified review.
Steps
- Collect all finding blocks from the dispatched reviewers. Set aside each code reviewer's
## Files examinedblock for Coverage: it is not a finding, so it is never deduped or ranked. - Dedup by
(file, line±5, category-root, overlap_hints): the same issue flagged by multiple reviewers collapses into one. A merge of a finding citing.review-pro/rules.mdwith one that does not drops the rules citation, so the Medium cap in Resolve conflicts never lowers evidence that stood without the rule. - Weight: annotate a finding flagged by 2 or more reviewers "flagged by N reviewers". It is a note about coverage, not evidence: see
## Verification. - Resolve conflicts by ownership: the domain owner sets severity (see table). A finding citing
.review-pro/rules.mdis capped at Medium here, before verification selects anything: see## Repository rules. - Verification results: the orchestrator verifies the merged Medium+ code findings at this point and hands you the results. Apply them as
## Verificationsays before going on. - Calibrate severity: enforce the anti-overreporting bar. Downgrade anything not fully traced to evidence. Never upgrade beyond what a specialist justified. A verified finding is not recalibrated: see
## Verification. - Out-of-diff evidence check (see below): a review-level confidence signal, not a per-finding gate.
- Coverage (see below): which changed files the review read, from the dispatch plan and the reviewers' own declarations. Review-level, never a gate.
- Verdict + prioritized findings + remediations.
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.
- 26d ago Changed · +1 lines 7f97a00b153e
- 1mo ago Changed · +20 lines abed7fadd755
- 1mo ago Changed · +69 lines c56175b663e4
- 1mo ago Changed · +47 lines 7379bb0b1f45
- 1mo ago First seen · 141 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A e2b57cd9b744
review-pro-synthesize is a skill published in the GitHub repository tufantunc/review-pro (5 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 6,130 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
logic-review
Find logic bugs in a single file or function via semi-formal execution tracing (Premises → Trace → Divergence → Trigger → Remedy). Trigger when a user shares code and suspects something is wrong without naming a concrete failure — phrases like "review this", "does this look right", "check this function", "audit this…
logic-fix-all
Autonomous repository-wide audit-and-fix pipeline: health → review → locate/explain → fix → diff-verify → iterate until clean. Starts with a mandatory consent prompt (token-intensive); after consent runs hands-free. Trigger when the user wants ALL logic issues found and fixed — "fix everything", "fix all logic…
logic-health
Sweep a directory, module, or full codebase for logic correctness and produce a scored health dashboard with systemic patterns. Trigger when the user requests a health view — "audit the whole codebase", "health check", "health overview", "logic health overview", "audit src/", "audit auth and payments modules", "where…
run-iteration-eval
Run the Logic-Lens content-eval pipeline for one iteration and produce a scored summary.json — use to measure a skill change. Wraps scripts/run-content-evals.sh (runner, costs tokens) and scripts/grade-iteration.py (grader, free, re-runnable). ALWAYS sync the plugin cache first. Use when the user wants to "run the…
new-skill
Scaffold a new logic- skill in the Logic-Lens repo and wire it into every place a skill must be registered, so no step is missed. Use when adding a seventh (or later) skill to Logic-Lens.
sync-skill-cache
Sync the Logic-Lens working-copy skills/ into the installed plugin cache so content-evals test the EDITED skill, not the last published one. ALWAYS run this after editing any skills//SKILL.md or guide/shared file and BEFORE running content-evals — otherwise the eval silently grades stale content and every token is…