Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/WaterplanAI/agentic-confignpx agentmods add skills/waterplanai/agentic-config/ac-qa-gh-pr-reviewWrote 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/waterplanai/agentic-config/ac-qa-gh-pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/waterplanai/agentic-config/ac-qa-gh-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/waterplanai/agentic-config/ac-qa-gh-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/waterplanai/agentic-config/ac-qa-gh-pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/waterplanai/agentic-config/ac-qa-gh-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 | $0.00033 | $0.03251 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.01625 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00650 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00325 |
Grade A, and why
ac-qa-gh-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 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 — 411 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PR Review - pi adaptation
Review a pull request with a bounded shared worker-wave on top of the shipped @agentic-config/pi-compat orchestration helpers.
Current shipped boundary
This pi wrapper now ships, but it stays inside the bounded IT003 contract:
- use exactly one fixed review-worker wave through
subagent - use the shared
pi-compatworker protocol and result helpers for worker outputs - keep PR metadata fetch, final markdown synthesis, and any
gh pr reviewaction in the coordinator skill - keep review posting user-confirmed and serial through
AskUserQuestion - do not introduce nested workers,
subagent.chain, mux/session state, or package-local orchestration helpers - if the local checkout does not match the PR head, continue honestly in diff-first mode and report any execution limitation instead of pretending local commands validated the PR head
Arguments
pr_ref(required): PR URL,owner/repo#123, or anygh pr view-compatible PR referenceexpected_changes(optional): brief description of the intended change; if omitted, compare the diff against the PR title/body onlyreport_path(optional): explicit final report path; default totmp/gh-pr-review/<date>-<uuid>/PR-<number>-<uuid>.md
Required references
Read these when needed:
node_modules/@agentic-config/pi-compat/assets/orchestration/protocol/worker.mdnode_modules/@agentic-config/pi-compat/assets/orchestration/tools/write-result.jsnode_modules/@agentic-config/pi-compat/assets/orchestration/tools/summarize-results.js
Pre-flight
-
Verify
ghCLI is available and authenticated:gh --version gh auth status- If either step fails: STOP and explain what is missing.
-
Verify the current directory is inside the repo being reviewed:
REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)- If this fails: STOP. This skill needs a local repo so the workers can inspect the actual codebase and run bounded local validation when that is honest.
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 · 411 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 1b75646c4696
ac-qa-gh-pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository WaterplanAI/agentic-config (30 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 3,251 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
work-unit-commits
Plan commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.
gza-task-improve
Address feedback for a gza task inline — reads review findings and/or unresolved comments, checks out the branch, fixes must-fix items and comments, runs verify, and commits.
git-workflow
Use when working with Git — branch naming, commit messages, PR creation, rebasing, or the code review process — even when the user says 'push this' or 'merge the branch' without naming Git.
git-flow-pr
Executes the full PR-driven development workflow: create an isolated feature branch from the current work, commit all staged changes, rebase cleanly onto the selected base branch (skipping any ancestor commits already merged), push the branch, and open a GitHub pull request linked to a related issue. Includes guidance…
github-pr-review
Handles PR review comments and feedback resolution. Use when user wants to resolve PR comments, handle review feedback, fix review comments, address PR review, check review status, respond to reviewer, or verify PR readiness. Fetches comments via GitHub CLI, classifies by severity, applies fixes with user…
git-authoring
Authors and executes git work end to end — Conventional Commits messages, pull-request content, release notes, and pull-request review, plus the repository operations an engineer runs daily: branching, rebasing, squashing, cherry-picking, reverting, merge-conflict resolution, stashes, tags, remotes, and recovery…