common-skills: Skill for Claude Code

.agents/skills/cross-critique/SKILL.md

cross-critique is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from warpdotdev/common-skills. It costs 102 tokens per session (1,111 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A second review round in which agents critique one another's independent proposals before a final synthesis.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it after collecting several opinions on architecture choices, code reviews, or other contested technical decisions.
Why use it?
It exposes hidden assumptions, failure modes, and trade-offs that may be missed when one person combines the proposals alone.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: mentions subagents; installed under .agents/ (shared by several agents).

This is warpdotdev/common-skills's own configuration. It tells Claude Code and Codex how to work on common-skills itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything common-skills configures →

not rated 636repo +6 today A scan Socket: passSnyk: passSkillSpector: pass 102 tokens original MIT
Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to warpdotdev/common-skills. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/warpdotdev/common-skills/main/.agents/skills/cross-critique/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/warpdotdev/common-skills

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for cross-critique

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/cross-critique/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/cross-critique)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/cross-critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/cross-critique/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for cross-critique

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/cross-critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/cross-critique.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 102 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,111 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • Socket pass 18 Jun 2026
  • Snyk pass 18 Jun 2026
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00102 $0.01111
Opus 5.5 $0.00041 $0.00444
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00020 $0.00222
Haiku 4.5 $0.00010 $0.00111

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 1c6cf12ca9b8, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

cross-critique 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.

.agents/skills/cross-critique/SKILL.md · 87 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 87 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Cross-Critique

Use this skill to run a second round after several subagents have independently produced proposals or opinions on the same contested question. Instead of synthesizing their reports yourself, you circulate each proposal to the other authors and ask them to critique it — pros and cons — and then you synthesize the richer set of analyses that results.

Why this matters

When you generate independent proposals (different models, different angles), each author ends up with deep context on the question — often deeper than yours, since they did the investigation. If you jump straight to synthesizing their reports alone, you're the bottleneck: you can only see the tradeoffs you happen to notice.

Asking the authors to critique each other is what a good leader does when seeking advice: get a few people with differing perspectives in a room, let them poke holes in each other's reasoning, and you walk away with a far more complete picture than any one of them — or you — would produce alone. The authors will surface failure modes, hidden assumptions, and tradeoffs that neither you nor the original proposer flagged.

When to use it

Use cross-critique when a decision is contested — i.e. independent agents produced genuinely divergent proposals, or the question is subjective enough that reasonable approaches disagree. Good fits:

  • Architecture and design tradeoffs.
  • Code review where reviewers reached different conclusions.
  • Competing root-cause theories for a bug.
  • Code-structure or API-shape decisions with no single right answer.

Don't bother when the proposals already strongly agree, or when the question has an objective answer you can verify directly — critique adds latency and tokens, and its value comes specifically from resolving genuine disagreement. Within that scope, use it freely; you don't need a high-stakes justification, just real divergence worth resolving.

Prerequisite: you need independent proposals first

This skill is the second round. It assumes you already have N independent proposals in hand. If you don't yet:

Read the full file on GitHub · 87 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 87 lines · 102 tokens per session scan A 1c6cf12ca9b8

Subscribe to this mod's changes

cross-critique is a skill published in the GitHub repository warpdotdev/common-skills (636 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 102 tokens to every session and 1,111 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

local-ai-agents

Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…

microsoft/ai-agents-for-beginners · 200 tokens

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

next-cache-components-adoption

Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…

vercel/next.js · 95 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens

insight-error-page

Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…

vercel/next.js · 83 tokens