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.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/warpdotdev/common-skills/main/.agents/skills/respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/warpdotdev/common-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/warpdotdev/common-skills/respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist/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/warpdotdev/common-skills/respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/warpdotdev/common-skills/respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk warn
- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 26 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00098 | $0.02975 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00039 | $0.01190 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00595 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00298 |
Grade A, and why
respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist 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 — 268 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Respond to PR comments in blocklist
Use this skill to respond to PR comments on the current branch. If comments are already visible in the conversation, typically from the built-in /pr-comments skill, continue from that context. If comments are not already visible, fetch and display them first, then guide the user through each actionable comment, collect an explicit decision, make requested code changes, and only then ask for approval before posting GitHub replies or resolving review threads.
When not to use this skill
Skip this skill when the user only wants PR comments fetched or displayed (use pr-comments instead) or only wants the underlying code changes made, with no intent to post replies or resolve threads on GitHub. Read this skill only once the user has confirmed they want replies posted or threads resolved.
Preconditions
- Work in the repository checkout for the PR branch.
- Do not refetch comments unless the loaded context is missing essential fields such as comment body, author, URL, path, or line metadata.
- Do not post GitHub replies, submit reviews, or resolve threads until the final preview is approved by the user.
If no PR comments are present in context, fetch and display them before continuing. Prefer invoking the built-in /pr-comments workflow when available. Otherwise use the equivalent GitHub CLI fallback: identify the current PR, fetch PR-level comments, review comments, and review bodies, then display them with insert_code_review_comments. After displaying fetched comments, ask the user whether to continue with this response workflow before making changes.
Comment filtering
Before asking for response mode, filter the loaded comments down to actionable comments that still need the user's attention.
Skip these comments without asking the user about them:
- Automated PR-level overview or status comments from Warp/Oz/code-review bots, especially comments with no attached file location that summarize review status, check progress, or say no code change is requested.
- Comments that have already been responded to by the current GitHub user.
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 · 268 lines · 98 tokens per session scan A e0fb9b1fd723
respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository warpdotdev/common-skills (636 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 98 tokens to every session and 2,975 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…