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 vanterx/mssql-performance-skills --skill tsql-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vanterx/mssql-performance-skillsWrote 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/vanterx/mssql-performance-skills/tsql-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vanterx/mssql-performance-skills/tsql-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vanterx/mssql-performance-skills/tsql-review/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/vanterx/mssql-performance-skills/tsql-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vanterx/mssql-performance-skills/tsql-review.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 | $0.00137 | $0.14417 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00068 | $0.07208 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00027 | $0.02883 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.01442 |
Grade A, and why
tsql-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 12d 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 — 542 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
T-SQL Static Review Skill
Purpose
Analyze T-SQL source code — stored procedures, ad-hoc queries, scripts, migration files — for anti-patterns that are detectable without running the query or capturing an execution plan. Covers 85 checks (T1–T85) across six categories: structural anti-patterns, correctness and logic, security and dynamic SQL, deprecated and non-idiomatic syntax, performance smells, and SQL Server 2017–2022 modern syntax checks.
This is the "shift-left" complement to sqlplan-review. Run it during code review to catch problems before they reach production. Run sqlplan-review on the resulting execution plan to catch what only surfaces at runtime.
Input
Accept any of:
- Raw T-SQL source code (paste inline or provide a file path)
- A
.sqlfile path - A description of the query structure ("a stored proc with a cursor that builds a dynamic WHERE clause")
If the user provides a file path, read the file and analyze its content. If the input is inline SQL, analyze it directly. If the input is a description, apply the checks based on what is described and note which checks could not be verified from the description alone.
How to Run
Walk T1–T85 in category order. Report every triggered finding — do not stop at the first match. For checks where the SQL construct is absent, note them as passing in the Passed Checks section. For checks where schema or parameter type information is unknown, state your assumption explicitly rather than skipping the check.
Thresholds Reference
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| CTE chain depth warning | > 4 levels deep |
| Large IN list | > 20 discrete values in an IN() clause |
| Nested subquery depth | ≥ 3 levels of nested scalar subqueries |
| Excessive parameters | > 50 named parameters in a stored procedure |
| Wide index suggestion | > 4 key columns OR > 5 INCLUDE columns |
| NOLOCK overuse threshold | ≥ 3 tables WITH (NOLOCK) in the same query |
| Small variable-length type | ≤ 2 characters (VARCHAR(1), VARCHAR(2), NVARCHAR(1), NVARCHAR(2)) |
What ships with it
7 files 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.
- 12d ago First seen · 542 lines · 137 tokens per session scan A aa9555f50b8c
tsql-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository vanterx/mssql-performance-skills (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 137 tokens to every session and 14,417 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
triage-contributor-pr
Triage open pull requests from external contributors to prisma/prisma and produce a per-PR verdict with evidence. Use when a maintainer asks to triage, evaluate, assess, or review the queue of incoming contributor PRs, to decide whether a fork PR is safe to run CI on, to check whether a PR is in scope for its version…
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
no-bare-casts
Writing as in TypeScript or TSX production code, modifying a file that contains a bare as cast, silencing a type error with a cast, encountering as unknown as, or reviewing a cast site.
review-prs
Review a GitHub pull request in the googleapis/mcp-toolbox repo against the team's reviewer checklist: PR title/description conventions, linked issue, logic errors and unhandled edge cases, breaking changes, test coverage, docs updates, security (input handling), and new dependencies. Use whenever a maintainer asks…
migration-review
Review database migration files when a change adds or modifies paths under migrations/. Use it before merge to collect forward, rollback, locking, and data-safety evidence.
product-review-report
A product-review workflow that researches a product and writes a Markdown report for deciding whether it is worth buying and using. It compares products from both the decision-maker's and everyday user's viewpoints.