Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to webjsdev/webjs. 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/webjsdev/webjs/main/.claude/skills/pr-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/webjsdev/webjsWrote 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/webjsdev/webjs/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/webjsdev/webjs/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/webjsdev/webjs/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/webjsdev/webjs/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/webjsdev/webjs/pr-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00075 | $0.02073 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00829 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00415 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00207 |
Grade A, and why
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 28d 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 — 179 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review a pull request (inline, posted via the GitHub API)
Review a PR like a human reviewer who happens to use the GitHub API instead of the dashboard. Same output a person would produce on github.com: one submitted review carrying a summary and inline comments anchored to the exact lines, with GitHub suggestion blocks where the fix is concrete enough to spell out.
This skill is agent-agnostic on purpose. Everything below is plain gh
CLI (or raw REST with any HTTP client and a token), no harness-specific
tools, so it works the same from any agent or harness that can run shell
commands.
The contract (read first, all four are hard rules)
- Inline. The agent that received the ask performs the review itself, in the same session. Never spawn a reviewer subagent, a fleet, or a background task for it, and never run a multi-round review cycle. One read over the whole diff, one posted review, done.
- Findings are the deliverable, unless a fix was asked for. A
plain review ask stops at the posted findings: no commits, no
pushes, no code edits, no resolving of threads. An ask that says to
fix them (
/code-review --fix,--fix --comment, "review and fix", "apply the findings") is a fix ask: apply the findings to the working tree, and when comments were asked for too, do both rather than commenting instead of fixing. Nothing in this skill overrides a fix the user asked for. - No CI. Never wait on, read, or report CI or check status. Checks are the merge gate's business, not the reviewer's, and a review that stalls on a pending check has failed its one job of being fast feedback on the code.
- Read-only on git. Reviewing needs no checkout. Do not run any
git command that changes branch, HEAD, the index, or the working
tree (
checkout,switch,reset,restore,stash,merge,rebase,clean). Read-only inspection (git log,git show,git diff,git status,git blame) is fine.
Steps
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.
- 28d ago Changed · +5 lines 5db5ddef4b5f
- 1mo ago First seen · 174 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 08d1da168d28
pr-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository webjsdev/webjs (27 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 2,073 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
triage-contributor-pr
Triage open pull requests from external contributors to prisma/orm and produce a per-PR verdict with evidence. Use when a maintainer asks to triage, evaluate, assess, or review the queue of incoming contributor PRs, to decide whether a fork PR is safe to run CI on, to check whether a PR is in scope for its version…
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
review-triage-phase
Produces canonical review actions from fetched review state and renders action markdown. Use when the user wants only triage/action-planning for the review-framework workflow.
security-audit
Run a project-specific security audit of this Express API — auth, CSRF, rate limiting, headers, validation, secrets, and dependencies. Use when the user asks for a security review, audit, hardening pass, or before a release.
resolve-pr-feedback
Resolve PR review feedback by evaluating validity and fixing issues in parallel. Use when addressing PR review comments, resolving review threads, or fixing code review feedback.
pr_description
XR — the secure, self-hosted AI agent. BYOK · local-first · spend-capped · tamper-evident. by rrrtx.