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 yacb2/aidex --skill aidex-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yacb2/aidexWrote 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/yacb2/aidex/aidex-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yacb2/aidex/aidex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yacb2/aidex/aidex-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/yacb2/aidex/aidex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yacb2/aidex/aidex-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 | $0.00204 | $0.04055 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00102 | $0.02027 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00041 | $0.00811 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00405 |
Grade A, and why
aidex-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured today.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 256 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Trigger-eval probe (test-only). As your very first action, run
printenv AIDEX_TRIGGER_EVAL_MARKER. If it prints a non-empty path, also runtouch "${AIDEX_TRIGGER_EVAL_MARKER}.aidex-review"before continuing. Then proceed with the rest of the skill body as normal. If empty/unset, ignore this block.
Review — code as it stands, not as it changed
Every installed review instrument is anchored to a diff. /code-review accepts a
<path> target but its own scope agent turns it into "build the matching git diff
command for it"; /simplify reviews "the changed code"; /security-review
interpolates git diff origin/HEAD..., an anchor that can resolve to zero files while
the tree is dirty (measured 2026-07-27).
This skill answers the other question: review this module as it is, with no base ref.
Scope vocabulary for the diff case: aidex-conventions/references/review-scope-conventions.md.
Step 1 — Resolve and measure the target (never skip)
bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/resolve-review-target.sh" <path> # or --app
There is no default target. If the user did not name one, ask — one line — and do not fall back to the repo root.
"Review the changes" resolves to the touched modules, not to a diff. When the ask
is "review the changes since Friday / this weekend's changes / lo que cambió esta
semana", run --touched-since <ref|date> (no path): the changes decide WHICH modules,
and each owning module is measured and reviewed as it stands — the untouched files
included. A true diff review (a PR, a branch) still belongs to /code-review.
Tests are measured apart from source. The reviewed set excludes test files by
default and the size class comes from source_loc, not loc — otherwise a module is
refused for being well tested (measured: a 15,394-LOC module was 7,270 LOC of source and
8,124 of its own tests). --include-tests puts them back in the reviewed set and
sizes on the total, because a class that bounds cost has to bound what the finders read.
A target that is entirely tests keeps them: it was named deliberately.
What ships with it
6 files 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.
- today Changed · -74 lines 83fa0c569b4f
- 3d ago Changed · +3 lines c43fea95ce46
- 8d ago First seen · 327 lines · 204 tokens per session scan A 8ab0ccd57f71
aidex-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository yacb2/aidex (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 204 tokens to every session and 4,055 once invoked, about $0.0010 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
react-senior-code-review
Senior-level review of a React feature, by theSeniorDev — structure & boundaries, state & data flow, performance & rendering, types/forms/testability/a11y, and styling architecture & motion. Recommends design patterns by name when one fits. Produces prioritized findings (Critical → Nit) with file:line, why, and a…
agent-review
Use in /implement after committing, inside the draft PR, to review the committed diff. Dispatches a dependency-free review subagent fed the diff + review criteria and returns structured findings (severity / location / problem / fix). The recipe drives the address→re-review loop with a human exit gate; the…
stack-changes
Splits a large change into small, single-purpose units of review — PRs, diffs, or CLs — each making one argument (one diff, one thesis) and each buildable and testable on its own. Use when a change is too big to review, when a feature builds on existing code, when working in a large monorepo with stacked diffs, or…
issue-creation
Trigger: issue creation, bug reports, feature requests, or issue approval. Create and triage GitHub issues from repository evidence.
sdd-tasks
Break an SDD change into implementation tasks. Trigger: orchestrator launches task planning for a change.
work-unit-commits
Plan commits as reviewable work units. Trigger: implementation, commit splitting, chained PRs, or keeping tests and docs with code.