Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to unbound-force/gaze. 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/unbound-force/gaze/main/.opencode/skills/review-context/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/unbound-force/gazeWrote 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/unbound-force/gaze/review-context)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/unbound-force/gaze/review-context"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/unbound-force/gaze/review-context.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 | $0.00021 | $0.01913 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00957 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00383 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00191 |
Grade A, and why
review-context 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 4d 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 — 258 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Skill: Review Context Discovery
Shared logic for discovering and loading review context before a review command begins its analysis. Consuming commands load this skill to standardize how spec artifacts, linked issues, path classifications, and walkthrough summaries are discovered and formatted.
Consumers
| Command | How it loads | Notes |
|---|---|---|
/review-pr |
Skill tool | Replaces inline Steps 6-8 logic |
/review-council |
Skill tool | Phase 1c — Protocols 1, 3, 4; Protocol 2 conditional (explicit PR number only) |
/address-feedback |
Skill tool | Replaces inline fallback (line 143) |
The consuming command specifies which protocols to execute based on the available inputs (e.g., a local review has no PR body to parse for issue links).
Protocol 1: Spec Artifact Discovery
Locate the specification associated with the current change. The discovery order is deterministic — stop at the first match.
Step 1: Branch name matching
Derive the spec directory from the current branch name or PR branch name:
| Branch pattern | Spec location |
|---|---|
speckit/NNN-<name> or NNN-<name> (legacy) |
specs/<name>/spec.md (Speckit; strip speckit/ prefix) |
opsx/<name> |
openspec/changes/<name>/proposal.md (OpenSpec changes) |
opsx/<name> |
openspec/specs/<name>/spec.md (OpenSpec specs) |
Step 2: PR description parsing
If no spec is found via branch name and a PR description is available, scan for explicit spec references (e.g., "See spec 012" or "Implements specs/012-swarm/spec.md" or "branch speckit/012-swarm").
Step 3: Changed-file detection
If no spec is found via branch name or PR description, check the changed file list for spec artifacts. The spec may be introduced by the change itself. If found in changed files, read the spec content from the diff rather than from the filesystem.
Step 4: Read relevant sections
When a spec is found, read only the sections relevant to review to minimize token usage:
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 258 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 1ea567fe0d3c
review-context is a skill published in the GitHub repository unbound-force/gaze (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,913 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…