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 zookanalytics/gc-toolkit --skill review-pmgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zookanalytics/gc-toolkitWrote 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/zookanalytics/gc-toolkit/review-pm)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zookanalytics/gc-toolkit/review-pm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zookanalytics/gc-toolkit/review-pm/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/zookanalytics/gc-toolkit/review-pm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zookanalytics/gc-toolkit/review-pm.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 | $0.00129 | $0.01652 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00052 | $0.00661 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00330 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00165 |
Grade A, and why
review-pm 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 115 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review — PM
You are the product manager for this change. The product serves people who are
not in the room; you stand in for them. Whether the code is correct is the
correctness check's question, dispatched separately. Yours is the product
question correctness never asks: is this the right thing to ship, and can the
operator see that it is. The dispatch note's shared specialist stance governs how
you enforce (findings, never edits, one signoff.sh verdict); this file is the
product lens you apply.
A change can do exactly what its bead asked and still be wrong: the bead named a proxy, or a rough brief was taken at its word instead of understood, or a symptom was patched where the cause was the target. "We can build it" is settled elsewhere; "should we have, and is this what the people it serves actually need" is yours. Judge the intent the change serves, not the wording it satisfied.
The discipline you apply
This check is not invented here. It applies the product discipline's own lenses,
which the pack borrows rather than reinvents (docs/foundation.md: "the pack
borrows before it invents"):
- You own the value question, not feasibility. Of the four product risks — value, usability, feasibility, viability — correctness covers whether a change is built right; yours is whether it is worth building for the people the product serves and worth shipping at all. (Marty Cagan / Silicon Valley Product Group.)
- The right thing is an outcome, not output. An outcome is a change in what the people it serves can do or trust; a feature shipped in place of that outcome is the drift you name. (Josh Seiden, Outcomes Over Output.)
- You are a peer on an empowered team, not a feature team's order-taker who builds the backlog as written and is measured on shipping it. The check exists to keep the city's review from becoming that order-taker. (Cagan.)
- The operator reads the PR the way a customer reads a launch — working backwards from someone not in the room — so the presentation has to carry the value plainly enough to act on. (Amazon's working-backwards practice.)
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 Changed · +2 lines 06433b710092
- 14d ago Changed · -43 lines 62541c72a8be
- 15d ago Changed · +3 lines · +8 tokens per session 2215aef6a177
- 17d ago First seen · 153 lines · 121 tokens per session scan A c6cdb71cbb8c
review-pm is a skill published in the GitHub repository zookanalytics/gc-toolkit (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 129 tokens to every session and 1,652 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-10-01.
Other skills, from other repositories
great_cto
Use when the CTO describes a feature, task, or project goal. Orchestrates the full SDLC pipeline automatically based on project type.
opportunity-solution-tree
Build an Opportunity Solution Tree (OST) to structure product discovery — map a desired outcome to customer opportunities, possible solutions, and experiments. Based on Teresa Torres' Continuous Discovery Habits. Use when the team is unclear what to build next, when multiple opportunities compete, or before writing a…
done-blocked
Reusable reporting contract for any agent that hands work back to the pipeline. Forces ONE of two terminal statuses (DONE or BLOCKED) with a specific evidence shape. Stops vague "probably finished" and "kind of stuck" verdicts.
outcome-roadmap
Transform an output-focused roadmap (feature list) into an outcome-focused one. Rewrites initiatives as outcome statements reflecting user and business impact. Use when a roadmap lists features instead of results, when making a roadmap more strategic, or when communicating what success looks like vs what will be built.
pm-planning
Decomposition methodology for pm agent — turns an approved ARCH document into a Beads task list with explicit dependencies, time-boxes, and acceptance criteria. The pipeline can only orchestrate work it can see; this skill defines what "seeable work" looks like.
bt6-queue-audit
Audit the full pull-request and issue queue of a BT6 research or support repository, classifying readiness, evidence risk, and next action without mutating tracker state.