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 umputun/cc-thingz --skill prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/umputun/cc-thingzWrote 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/pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/umputun/cc-thingz/pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/umputun/cc-thingz/pr/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/umputun/cc-thingz/pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/umputun/cc-thingz/pr.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 515 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 443 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00051 | $0.05270 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.02108 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.01054 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00527 |
Grade A, and why
pr 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 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.
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 — 596 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Review Skill
Comprehensive pull request review that analyzes code quality, architecture, test coverage, and identifies scope creep (unrelated changes mixed into the PR).
Activation Triggers
- "review pr 123", "check pr 123", "look at pr 123"
- "review the pr", "what do you think about this pr"
- "review draft pr", "check the open pr"
- "comment on issue 42", "look at issue 42", "review issue 42"
Workflow
1. Fetch PR metadata + discussion history + merge status
1.5. Ask review mode: Full (default) or Quick
--- Full path ---
2. Setup worktree, launch subagent for deep analysis (read files, validate, architecture, scope creep, cleanup)
3. Present condensed findings from subagent, ask to proceed
4. Resolve open questions (if any)
5. Draft review comment
--- Quick path ---
Q1. Read diff inline, summarize what/why/size
Q2. Flag obvious issues from diff
Q3. Draft review comment
Phase 0: Detect PR vs Issue
Determine if the target is a PR or an issue. If a URL is provided, check if it contains /pull/ or /issues/. If just a number, detect type:
gh pr view <number> --json number 2>/dev/null && echo "PR" || echo "ISSUE"
- PR → proceed with full PR review workflow (Phase 1 onwards)
- Issue → use the Issue Comment Flow below, skip all PR-specific phases
Issue Comment Flow
For issues, skip worktree/diff/architecture analysis. Focus on understanding the issue and drafting a helpful comment.
- Fetch issue details and discussion:
gh issue view <number> --json title,body,author,state,labels,comments,createdAt
-
Read the full discussion - understand what was reported, what others said, whether there are linked PRs
-
Investigate the codebase if the issue references specific code, files, or behavior:
- search for relevant files, read them
- understand the reported problem in context
-
Draft a comment addressing the issue - could be: analysis of root cause, a proposed approach, questions for clarification, or acknowledgment with next steps
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 · 596 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 6a6c424473bd
pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository umputun/cc-thingz (487 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 5,270 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 2026-08-30.
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.
release
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release"…
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-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-resolve-pr
Resolve PR review feedback. Fetches unresolved threads, triages, fixes, replies and resolves via GraphQL. Use when asked to address review comments.
flow-next-land
Resolve feedback and CI for one named pull request, then merge when authorized and ready. Emits LANDVERDICT. Use when asked to land a pull request.