Agentic Plugin Marketplace is a collection of reusable plugins, agents, skills, commands, and rules for coding-agent tools including Claude Code, Codex CLI, Cursor, OpenCode, Antigravity CLI, and GitHub Copilot. It is for developers assembling agentic workflows across multiple harnesses from shared Markdown sources, and the catalogue entries are examples or subsets of those workflow components.
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 wshobson/agents --skill multi-reviewer-patternsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wshobson/agentsWrote 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/wshobson/agents/multi-reviewer-patterns)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wshobson/agents/multi-reviewer-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wshobson/agents/multi-reviewer-patterns/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/wshobson/agents/multi-reviewer-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wshobson/agents/multi-reviewer-patterns.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk pass
- 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 | $0.00049 | $0.01050 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00420 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00210 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00105 |
Grade A, and why
multi-reviewer-patterns 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.
Copies of this mod
3 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- multi-reviewer-patterns — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- multi-reviewer-patterns — 100% identical, 5 lines differ
- multi-reviewer-patterns — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Multi-Reviewer Patterns
Patterns for coordinating parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions, deduplicating findings, calibrating severity, and producing consolidated reports.
When to Use This Skill
- Organizing a multi-dimensional code review
- Deciding which review dimensions to assign
- Deduplicating findings from multiple reviewers
- Calibrating severity ratings consistently
- Producing a consolidated review report
Review Dimension Allocation
Available Dimensions
| Dimension | Focus | When to Include |
|---|---|---|
| Security | Vulnerabilities, auth, input validation | Always for code handling user input or auth |
| Performance | Query efficiency, memory, caching | When changing data access or hot paths |
| Architecture | SOLID, coupling, patterns | For structural changes or new modules |
| Testing | Coverage, quality, edge cases | When adding new functionality |
| Accessibility | WCAG, ARIA, keyboard nav | For UI/frontend changes |
Recommended Combinations
| Scenario | Dimensions |
|---|---|
| API endpoint changes | Security, Performance, Architecture |
| Frontend component | Architecture, Testing, Accessibility |
| Database migration | Performance, Architecture |
| Authentication changes | Security, Testing |
| Full feature review | Security, Performance, Architecture, Testing |
Finding Deduplication
When multiple reviewers report issues at the same location:
Merge Rules
- Same file:line, same issue — Merge into one finding, credit all reviewers
- Same file:line, different issues — Keep as separate findings
- Same issue, different locations — Keep separate but cross-reference
- Conflicting severity — Use the higher severity rating
- Conflicting recommendations — Include both with reviewer attribution
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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 · 128 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 30a8e067af08
multi-reviewer-patterns is a skill published in the GitHub repository wshobson/agents (41,247 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 1,050 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
blast-radius
Find what a change could break somewhere else before it ships, beyond the diff, and prove the one fact it's safe because of by running real code instead of writing it up. Use for 'blast radius of X', 'what could this break', reviewing a small diff you don't trust, or a brief that asserts something about existing code…
thermo-nuclear-review
Comprehensive security and correctness audit of a branch's changes. Use for thermo nuclear, thermonuclear, or deep review requests, or branch/PR diff audits focused on bugs, breaking changes, security issues, devex regressions, and feature-gate leaks.
no-comments
Spawn the comment-sicko subagent, fix accepted findings, and offer encodings for claimed constraints.
tech-debt-audit
Thorough, file-cited technical debt audit across 9 dimensions using AST-grep (tree-sitter), grep, LSP, and language-native tooling. Produces TECHDEBTAUDIT.md with severity, effort estimates, and prioritized fixes. Use when asked for codebase health check, tech debt audit, architecture review, code quality assessment…
chisle-review
Review a diff or file through the Chisle lens: flag over-engineering, speculative abstractions, reinvented stdlib, and verbose code that a lazier approach would shrink. One finding per line, no praise. Use when the user says "chisle review", "review this for bloat", or invokes /chisle-review.
chisle-help
Quick-reference card for Chisle commands. One-shot display, not a persistent mode. Use when the user says "chisle help", "how do I use chisle", "what chisle commands", or invokes /chisle-help.