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 YYH211/Claude-meta-skill --skill local-diff-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/YYH211/Claude-meta-skillWrote 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/yyh211/claude-meta-skill/local-diff-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yyh211/claude-meta-skill/local-diff-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yyh211/claude-meta-skill/local-diff-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/yyh211/claude-meta-skill/local-diff-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yyh211/claude-meta-skill/local-diff-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 | $0.00090 | $0.00929 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00045 | $0.00464 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00186 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
local-diff-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 9d 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.
What it actually says
Local Diff Review（提交前本地评审）
核心原则
- 审查标准必须与
pr-review保持一致，不允许自定义弱化标准。 - 先审查再改代码：默认先输出问题清单，只有用户明确要求才改代码。
- 结论必须可执行：每个问题都要给出文件路径、行号、风险说明、修复建议。
审查标准来源（必须遵循）
- 代码质量标准：
./code-quality-standards.md - 常见问题清单：
./common-issues-checklist.md
说明：本 skill 的“评审准则”以
pr-review当前版本为准，以上链接即唯一标准来源。
使用场景
- 用户希望“先本地 review，再提 PR”。
- 用户给出“review 我当前改动/本地 diff/暂存区改动/分支差异”。
- 用户希望获得与 PR review 同等级别的风险分级反馈。
信息收集流程
先收集仓库状态：
git status --short
git branch --show-current
git remote -v
再根据用户意图选择 diff 范围（默认优先问清楚范围）：
# 1) 未暂存改动
git diff
# 2) 已暂存改动
git diff --staged
# 3) 工作区全部改动（含暂存+未暂存）
git diff HEAD
# 4) 当前分支相对基线分支（推荐用于“准备提 PR”）
git diff upstream/<base-branch>...HEAD
# 5) 指定提交
git show <commit>
审查步骤
- 阅读 diff，按文件分组梳理改动目的。
- 依次执行三维度审查（严格按上面 3 份标准文档）。
- 标注问题等级：
- 🔴 严重问题（必须修复）
- 🟡 建议改进（建议本次修）
- 🟢 可选优化（可后续处理）
- 汇总回归风险：i18n、类型安全、边界行为、兼容性、性能影响。
- 给出审查结论：可合并 / 需修改后再审。
输出格式（建议）
1) 变更概览
- 审查范围（哪一种 diff）
- 涉及文件数、核心模块
2) 问题清单
每个问题都包含：
- 文件路径 + 行号
- 风险等级（🔴/🟡/🟢）
- 问题描述（为什么是问题）
- 修复建议（给出可落地方案）
3) 总体结论
- 是否建议现在提 PR
- 提 PR 前建议补做的最小验证（如 lint / typecheck / 相关测试）
评审时的行为约束
- 不凭空猜测业务意图；证据不足时明确“需用户确认”。
- 不把“个人偏好”当成阻塞项。
- 不为不存在的调用路径添加过度防御性建议。
- 与用户沟通时优先中文、结论清晰、步骤可执行。
常用触发语句（示例）
- “请按 PR 标准 review 我本地当前改动。”
- “请 review 我的
git diff --staged，只给问题清单。” - “请按 FastGPT 规范审查我当前分支相对
upstream/v4.14.7-dev的改动。”
What ships with it
2 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 97 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A 90244ba0e78c
local-diff-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository YYH211/Claude-meta-skill (277 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 929 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
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.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
verify-behavior
Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…
github-contributor
End-to-end playbook for shipping high-quality pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — discovery, CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size check, minimal-diff implementation, PR description with AI-assisted disclosure, conflict resolution, and post-submission maintainer interaction. Use whenever creating…
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…
write-pr
Reference standards for writing pull request titles and descriptions in the tldraw repository, plus the pre-flight comment sweep over the diff. Use as supporting guidance when another skill or workflow needs PR content standards, not as the user-facing create/update PR workflow.