Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add umputun/cc-thingz/plugin install 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/umputun/cc-thingz/git-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/umputun/cc-thingz/git-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/umputun/cc-thingz/git-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00054 | $0.00944 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00472 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00189 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00094 |
Grade A, and why
git-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 6d 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 — 109 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Git Review
Interactive annotation-based code review using editor overlays.
Activation Triggers
- "git review", "review changes", "review my changes"
- "annotate changes", "interactive review"
- "review diff", "annotate diff"
How It Works
- Script generates a cleaned-up diff file (friendly headers, no technical noise)
- Opens in
$EDITORvia agterm overlay, tmux popup, kitty overlay, or wezterm split-pane - User adds annotations (comments, change requests) directly in the file
- Script returns user's annotations as a git diff
- Claude reads annotations, fixes code in the real repo
- Script regenerates fresh diff (reflecting fixes), opens again
- Loop until user closes editor without changes
Workflow
Step 1: Run the script
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/git-review/scripts/git-review.py [base_ref]
- No arguments: auto-detects uncommitted changes or branch vs default branch
- With argument: diffs against the specified ref (branch, tag, commit,
HEAD~3)
Step 2: Process annotations
If the script produces output (stdout), the user made annotations. The output is a git diff showing what the user added/changed in the review file.
Read the diff carefully:
- Added lines (+): user's annotations, comments, or change requests
- Removed lines (-): user wants something removed or changed
- Modified lines (- then +): user replaced text to show desired change
Each annotation is in context — the surrounding === file headers and diff content
show which file and code area the annotation refers to.
Step 3: Plan changes
Enter plan mode (EnterPlanMode) to analyze annotations and design the fix approach:
- list each annotation and which file/code area it refers to
- describe the planned changes for each annotation
- get user approval before modifying any code
Step 4: Address annotations
After plan approval, fix the actual source code in the real repository. Each annotation is a directive — treat it as a code review comment that must be addressed.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 109 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A b27eb09b60fd
git-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository umputun/cc-thingz (467 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 944 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
flow-next-worktree-kit
Manage git worktrees (create/list/switch/cleanup) and copy .env files. Use for parallel feature work, isolated review, clean workspace, or when user mentions worktrees.
code-review
Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/spec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use…
flow-next-impl-review
Carmack-level implementation review of changes via the configured backend. Use when asked to review code or a diff in a flow-next repo.
flow-next-land
Autonomous PR babysitter tick. Fixes CI, resolves feedback, merges when converged, closes the spec, releases. Emits LANDVERDICT. Use when asked to land PRs.
flow-next-spec-completion-review
Verify that a spec's completed tasks fully implement the spec requirements. Use at spec completion before close.
flow-next-plan-review
Carmack-level review of a flow-next spec or plan via the configured backend. Use when asked to review a plan or spec.