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 zgbrenner/agentcounsel --skill risk-factor-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zgbrenner/agentcounselWrote 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/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/risk-factor-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/risk-factor-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/risk-factor-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/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/risk-factor-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/risk-factor-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 | $0.00067 | $0.02435 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.01218 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00487 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00244 |
Grade A, and why
Risk Factor 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 7d 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 — 135 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Risk Factor Review
Purpose
Review the risk-factor section of a filing or offering document, surfacing specificity vs. boilerplate patterns, duplication, known-trend gaps, category-coverage gaps, and consistency with other sections and other filings. The skill records gaps and patterns; the attorney concludes adequacy. This skill provides draft work product for attorney review only and is not legal advice.
Use When
- An S-1, 10-K, 10-Q, S-4, proxy, prospectus supplement, PPM, or OM is being prepared and the risk-factor section needs a structured pass.
- A prior risk-factor section is being updated for a new period and the user needs "what changed, what's stale" surfaced.
- The user wants a category-coverage check against the current SEC risk-factor architecture and the issuer's actual circumstances.
Required Inputs
- Jurisdiction and governing law, or
[verify jurisdiction]. - Document type and the risk-factor section text.
- Issuer profile (business, segments, geographies, key customers/suppliers, regulatory environment).
- Prior risk-factor sections from comparable prior filings.
- MD&A and business-description sections of the document being reviewed.
- User-surfaced material developments and known trends affecting the issuer.
If the risk-factor text, issuer profile, or prior-filing comparison set is missing, stop substantive analysis and return an intake gap list.
Do Not Use When
- The user asks for a conclusion that the risk-factor section is adequate or complete.
- The user asks the model to conclude that any specific risk is or is not material.
- The user asks for a full offering-document review (route to
offering-document-disclosure-review). - The user asks for cross-filing consistency only (route to
sec-filing-consistency-check).
Also out of scope (this skill does not): provide final legal conclusions, approve filings, conclude on materiality, approve trading or solicitation, compute deadlines, or provide investment, tax, broker-dealer, exchange, FINRA, blue-sky, or investment-company conclusions.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 135 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A bffc3d3e0c98
Risk Factor Review is a skill published in the GitHub repository zgbrenner/agentcounsel (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 2,435 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
controleur-fiscal
Inspecteur des finances publiques IA. Simule un contrôle fiscal DGFIP complet sur les comptes d'une entreprise française (SASU, EURL, SAS, SARL). Analyse le FEC, la liasse fiscale, les charges déduites, le compte courant d'associé, la TVA, l'IS selon 8 axes de vérification. Identifie les chefs de redressement…
fiscaliste
Fiscaliste IA pour la fiscalité personnelle des particuliers français : optimisation et déclaration de l'impôt sur le revenu, IFI, revenus du capital, revenus fonciers, equity salarial, crypto-actifs et PER. Couvre le calcul de l'IR (barème, quotient familial, décote, PAS, CEHR, revenus exceptionnels), la déclaration…
commissaire-aux-comptes
Commissaire aux comptes IA pour l'audit des comptes annuels d'entreprises françaises. Applique la démarche NEP en 7 phases : prise de connaissance, contrôle du FEC, vérification du bilan, du compte de résultat, de la balance, de la liasse fiscale, et contrôles transversaux. Émet une opinion motivée sur la fiabilité…
agb-bei-kreditvertraegen-verbraucherdarlehen
Für AGB bei Kreditverträgen Verbraucherdarlehen: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt.
agb-in-kapitalanlagen-effektenhandel
Für AGB in Kapitalanlagen Effektenhandel: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt.
internal-controls-and-audit
Designs and tests controls over financial reporting — segregation of duties, approval limits, evidence, and preparing for audit. Use this to design controls for a process, prepare for an external audit, respond to an audit finding, set approval thresholds, or assess where a small team's segregation of duties is…