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 waqas1412/claude-harness --skill pr-commentsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/waqas1412/claude-harnessWrote 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/waqas1412/claude-harness/pr-comments)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/waqas1412/claude-harness/pr-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/waqas1412/claude-harness/pr-comments/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/waqas1412/claude-harness/pr-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/waqas1412/claude-harness/pr-comments.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 | $0.00052 | $0.01578 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00631 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00316 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00158 |
Grade A, and why
pr-comments scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 16d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 129 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/pr-comments: triage and close out review threads
Load .claude/harness/profile.md for REPO, LINT_CMD, UNIT_TEST_CMD, E2E_TEST_CMD,
BUILD_CMD. Infer from the repo if there is no profile.
The policy this encodes
Stated repeatedly and unchanged: if you agree, fix it and resolve; if you do not agree, justify it and resolve. Nothing is left open and nothing is resolved silently.
Step 1: read the threads, do not guess them
gh api graphql -f owner=<OWNER> -f repo=<REPO> -F pr=<N> -f query='
query($owner:String!,$repo:String!,$pr:Int!){
repository(owner:$owner,name:$repo){
pullRequest(number:$pr){
reviewThreads(first:100){
nodes{
id isResolved isOutdated path line
comments(first:20){nodes{author{login} body createdAt}}
}
}
}
}
}'
nodes[].id is the PRRT_... thread id both mutations need. Filter to isResolved == false. Read
every comment in a thread, not just the first: a reviewer often narrows or answers their own point
further down. Separate human reviewers from the CI reviewbot (github-actions); bot threads are still
triaged, but a human reviewer's thread is the one with a person's time attached to it.
Also check top-level PR comments, which are not review threads:
gh pr view <N> --json comments --jq '.comments[] | {a:.author.login, b:.body}'
Step 2: ground every claim before classifying it
Review feedback is a claim to verify, not an instruction to obey. Agreeing is as much a decision as
disagreeing, and it needs the same evidence. Before writing down a verdict, check the claim against the
grounds that can settle it: the INSTALLED library source in node_modules at the version this repo
pins, the version-matched official docs, real-world discussion of the same failure (the high-signal
Stack Overflow thread or upstream issue), and the repo's own gotchas and prior decisions. A reviewer's
suggested FIX gets the same treatment as their diagnosis: the diagnosis can be right while the proposed
remedy is wrong, so where the mechanism is subtle (effect ordering, layout timing, framework
internals), pin it with a failing test before you write the fix, not after.
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.
- 16d ago Changed · -54 tokens per session 44be5a7aa370
- 1mo ago Changed · +13 lines b0298f7bdd26
- 1mo ago Changed · -3 tokens per session 6e0cb2da3456
- 1mo ago First seen · 116 lines · 109 tokens per session scan A 61ca7b41f41b
pr-comments is a skill published in the GitHub repository waqas1412/claude-harness (2 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 1,578 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
review
Use when operating as the Fabrik Review stage agent. This skill guides code review of an implementation, finding and fixing issues, and ensuring the PR is ready for human review.
review-comment
Use when operating as the Fabrik Review comment reviewer. This skill guides applying user decisions on review findings — fixing issues, dismissing false positives, or deferring items — then committing and pushing without signaling stage completion.
gh-pr
Create, review, or manage GitHub pull requests. Use when asked to open, check, or merge a PR.
github-pr-workflow
GitHub PR lifecycle: branch, commit, open, CI, merge.
autofix-pr
Watch a pull request and fix it from a worktree of its own - CI failures, review feedback from trusted authors and merge conflicts are fixed, pushed to the PR branch and answered on the PR under the user's git and gh identity. Usage - /autofix-pr [ | ] [--once] [--every ] [--no-reply] [--yes] [instructions]…
babysit
Watch a pull request or review cycle until it is ready to merge. Use when asked to babysit, monitor, or keep checking PR comments, reviews, and CI until all actionable issues are resolved.