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 xiaobei930/cc-best --skill second-opiniongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/xiaobei930/cc-bestWrote 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/xiaobei930/cc-best/second-opinion)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/xiaobei930/cc-best/second-opinion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xiaobei930/cc-best/second-opinion.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00030 | $0.01285 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00642 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00257 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00128 |
Grade A, and why
second-opinion 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 3d 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 — 214 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Second Opinion 二次审查
概述
在以下场景使用二次审查:
- 架构决策:重大技术选型、系统设计
- 安全审查:认证、授权、数据处理逻辑
- 复杂重构:跨模块重构、API 变更
- 疑难调试:长时间无法解决的问题
方法一:使用 Oracle CLI(推荐)
Oracle 是一个专门用于此目的的工具。
安装
# 不需要安装,使用 npx 直接运行
npx -y @steipete/oracle --help
基本用法
# 预览(不消耗 token)
npx -y @steipete/oracle --dry-run summary \
-p "审查这个认证模块的安全性" \
--file "src/auth/**"
# 浏览器模式(推荐,使用 ChatGPT)
npx -y @steipete/oracle --engine browser --model gpt-5.2-pro \
-p "审查架构决策是否合理" \
--file "src/**" --file "!**/*.test.*"
# API 模式(需要 OPENAI_API_KEY)
npx -y @steipete/oracle --engine api \
-p "分析这个重构方案的风险" \
--file "src/core/**"
文件选择技巧
# 包含特定目录
--file "src/auth/**"
--file "src/api/**"
# 排除测试和快照
--file "src/**" --file "!**/*.test.*" --file "!**/*.snap"
# 包含配置文件
--file "package.json" --file "tsconfig.json"
方法二:手动二次审查
如果不使用 Oracle,可以手动进行二次审查:
1. 准备审查包
# 审查请求
## 项目背景
- 技术栈:[描述]
- 构建命令:[描述]
- 关键约束:[描述]
## 审查目标
[具体问题或决策]
## 相关代码
[粘贴关键代码片段]
## 已尝试的方案
[描述之前的尝试]
## 期望输出
- 风险评估
- 改进建议
- 替代方案
2. 选择审查模型
| 模型 | 适用场景 | 特点 |
|---|---|---|
| GPT-4/5 | 通用审查、架构分析 | 广泛知识、推理强 |
| Claude Opus | 复杂推理、代码分析 | 深度思考、上下文长 |
| Gemini Pro | 多模态、大规模代码 | 长上下文、快速 |
3. 审查清单
- 提供足够的项目背景
- 包含关键代码文件
- 明确审查目标
- 描述约束条件
- 指定期望输出格式
Prompt 模板
架构审查
我需要你审查以下架构决策:
## 项目背景
[技术栈、规模、团队情况]
## 当前方案
[描述架构设计]
## 备选方案
[其他考虑过的方案]
## 关注点
- 可扩展性
- 维护成本
- 团队技能匹配度
请提供:
1. 当前方案的优缺点分析
2. 潜在风险和缓解措施
3. 是否有更好的替代方案
安全审查
请对以下代码进行安全审查:
## 代码功能
[描述功能]
## 代码
[粘贴代码]
## 关注点
- OWASP Top 10
- 认证/授权逻辑
- 输入验证
- 敏感数据处理
请指出:
1. 安全漏洞(按严重程度排序)
2. 修复建议
3. 最佳实践建议
调试协助
我遇到了一个难以解决的问题:
## 症状
[描述问题表现]
## 重现步骤
[详细步骤]
## 已尝试
[之前的调试尝试]
## 相关代码
[粘贴代码]
## 错误信息
[完整错误信息]
请帮我:
1. 分析可能的根本原因
2. 建议调试方向
3. 提供可能的解决方案
最佳实践
DO ✅
- 提供完整的项目上下文
- 明确指定审查目标
- 包含约束和限制条件
- 要求结构化的输出
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 214 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 1fa7383cf1b9
second-opinion is a skill published in the GitHub repository xiaobei930/cc-best (50 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 1,285 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
design-patterns
Detect, suggest, and evaluate GoF design patterns in TypeScript/JavaScript codebases. Use when refactoring code, applying singleton/factory/observer/strategy patterns, reviewing pattern quality, or finding stack-native alternatives for React, Angular, NestJS, and Vue.
pr-triage
4-phase PR backlog management with audit, deep code review, validated comments, and optional worktree setup. Use when triaging pull requests, catching up on pending code reviews, or managing a backlog of open PRs. Args: 'all' to review all, PR numbers to focus (e.g. '42 57'), 'en'/'fr' for language, no arg = audit…
audit-agents-skills
Audit Claude Code agents, skills, and commands for quality and production readiness. Use when evaluating skill quality, checking production readiness scores, or comparing agents against best-practice templates.
eval-skills
Audit all skills in the current project for frontmatter completeness, effort level appropriateness, allowed-tools scoping, and content quality. Produces a scored report with effort-level recommendations for each skill. Use when onboarding to a new project, reviewing skill quality before shipping, or adding effort…
review-pr
Perform a comprehensive code review of a pull request.
sonarqube
Analyze SonarCloud quality issues for a specific PR.