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 VKirill/agent-consult --skill gitnexus-pr-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/VKirill/agent-consultWrote 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/vkirill/agent-consult/gitnexus-pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vkirill/agent-consult/gitnexus-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vkirill/agent-consult/gitnexus-pr-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/vkirill/agent-consult/gitnexus-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vkirill/agent-consult/gitnexus-pr-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 | $0.00058 | $0.01418 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00567 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00284 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00142 |
Grade A, and why
gitnexus-pr-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 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 — 168 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Usage
Loaded automatically when the description matches the active task. Specifics are documented in the body below.
PR Review with GitNexus
When to Use
- "Review this PR"
- "What does PR #42 change?"
- "Is this safe to merge?"
- "What's the blast radius of this PR?"
- "Are there missing tests for this PR?"
- Reviewing someone else's code changes before merge
Workflow
1. gh pr diff <number> → Get the raw diff
2. gitnexus_detect_changes({scope: "compare", base_ref: "main"}) → Map diff to affected flows
3. For each changed symbol:
gitnexus_impact({target: "<symbol>", direction: "upstream"}) → Blast radius per change
4. gitnexus_context({name: "<key symbol>"}) → Understand callers/callees
5. READ gitnexus://repo/{name}/processes → Check affected execution flows
6. Summarize findings with risk assessment
If "Index is stale" → run
npx gitnexus analyzein terminal before reviewing.
Checklist
- [ ] Fetch PR diff (gh pr diff or git diff base...head)
- [ ] gitnexus_detect_changes to map changes to affected execution flows
- [ ] gitnexus_impact on each non-trivial changed symbol
- [ ] Review d=1 items (WILL BREAK) — are callers updated?
- [ ] gitnexus_context on key changed symbols to understand full picture
- [ ] Check if affected processes have test coverage
- [ ] Assess overall risk level
- [ ] Write review summary with findings
Review Dimensions
| Dimension | How GitNexus Helps |
|---|---|
| Correctness | context shows callers — are they all compatible with the change? |
| Blast radius | impact shows d=1/d=2/d=3 dependents — anything missed? |
| Completeness | detect_changes shows all affected flows — are they all handled? |
| Test coverage | impact({includeTests: true}) shows which tests touch changed code |
| Breaking changes | d=1 upstream items that aren't updated in the PR = potential breakage |
Risk Assessment
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 · 168 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A b499754c27e7
gitnexus-pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository VKirill/agent-consult (1 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 1,418 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
code-review
Reviews a supplied code path or diff for correctness, security, maintainability, and style without executing or modifying it.
reviewing-update-sets
Reviewing, analyzing, and comparing ServiceNow update sets before promotion, singly or in batches. Shows changes, risks, dependencies, and conflicts. Use when the user mentions update sets, customizations, promotion, code review, change tracking, pre-deployment review, sysupdatexml, customer updates, 'what changed in…
coding-assistant
Provides coding assistance with best practices and code review.
live-audit
Audit steam-games-mcp — build/test/lint gate, live MCP tool edge-case sweep (input validation, SteamID64/vanity/appid edge cases, key-gating), and source-level code review. Use when asked to test/audit the published or just-fixed steam-games-mcp package, hunt for bugs/edge cases, or repeat "the same kind of testing as…
pr-reviewer
Review a requested pull request, branch diff or completed task against its actual scope, source and checks. Prepare evidence and comments; post or record a human verdict only when explicitly authorized.
gitlab-review
Review a GitLab merge request, inspect changes and discussions, or prepare and post explicitly requested review feedback. Use for GitLab MRs and review follow-ups, not GitHub pull requests or automatic approval/merge.