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 ZTE-AICloud/Co-OmniSpec --skill mini-implement-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ZTE-AICloud/Co-OmniSpecWrote 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/zte-aicloud/co-omnispec/mini-implement-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zte-aicloud/co-omnispec/mini-implement-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zte-aicloud/co-omnispec/mini-implement-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/zte-aicloud/co-omnispec/mini-implement-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zte-aicloud/co-omnispec/mini-implement-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 | $0.00014 | $0.00926 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00370 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00185 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
mini-implement-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 1mo 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to mini-design-review — 43 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
仓库根目录下执行脚本(不要从技能目录下找) scripts/bash/mini-delete-review.sh --implement。
准备阶段
- 判断当前操作系统，windows还是linux系统;
- 清理上次评审结果：
- linux:仓库根目录下执行脚本(不要从技能目录下找)
scripts/bash/mini-delete-review.sh --implement。 - windows: 仓库根目录下执行脚本(不要从技能目录下找)
scripts/powershell/mini-delete-review.ps1 --implement。
- 获取详设文档
- linux：仓库根目录下执行脚本(不要从技能目录下找):
scripts/bash/mini-check.sh --json - windows：仓库根目录下执行脚本(不要从技能目录下找):
scripts/powershell/mini-check.ps1 --json- 解析 JSON 获取 DESIGN ，DESIGN 为详设文档。 对于参数中的单引号如 "I'm Groot", 使用转义语法: 例如 'I'''m Groot'(或尽可能使用双引号: "I'm Groot").
- 解析 JSON 获取 FEATURE_DIR ， FEATURE_DIR 需求相关文档产物所在目录。
- 判断详设文档 DESIGN 是否存在，且内容不为空。如果详设文档 DESIGN 不存在或者内容为空，则结束该SKILL。
评审次数上限保护
- 读取文件 FEATURE_DIR/implement-review-times.md ，该文件内容为一个数字，表示当前为第几次评审。
- *** 当前评审次数大于等于3 *** ，向FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md中写入
评审通过，然后直接结束本技能，不执行后续步骤。
检查校验
通过git diff 获取本次代码修改，检查代码是否修改是否满足下述各类检查项，检查结果写到文档 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md， 写清楚哪个位置违反了什么校验条件 *** 只评审下述提到的要求评审，不自己增加评审项 ***
功能实现完整检查
- 读取详设文档 DESIGN，判断每个用户故事、每个修改点是否修改完成。
- 如果全部修改完成，则 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md 中写入，
功能实现完整检查：通过
宪章检查
- 读取
.omni-infra/memory/constitution.md：了解章程约束，判断代码修改中是否有违反规章约束。 - 如果没有违反该项检查，则 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md 中写入，
宪章检查：通过
新增函数检查
- 新实现的任何函数，需要确认无相同功能的函数。
- 如果没有违反该项检查，则 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md 中写入，
新增函数检查：通过
调用现有函数检查
- 调用的已有函数，需要实际读取函数完整代码确认实现逻辑是否符合本次需求要求。
- 如果没有违反该项检查，则 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md 中写入，
调用现有函数检查：通过
清理未使用代码
- 检查：本次修改代码后，不再使用的函数、全局变量等，判断是否还有其他位置使用，如果未使用，需要删除。
- 如果没有违反该项检查，则 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md 中写入，
清理未使用代码检查：通过
新增常量检查
- 检查新增的常量，在现有代码中是否已有全局变量定义，如果有，则复用原有变量。
- 如果没有违反该项检查，则 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md 中写入，
新增常量检查检查：通过
新增全局变量位置检查
- 检查新增的全局变量定义位置是否和现有风格保持一致，查看是否有类似功能的全局变量统一定义在了某个文件。
- 如果没有违反该项检查，则 FEATURE_DIR/review-result.md 中写入，
新增全局变量位置检查：通过
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 60 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 634de939c5a7
mini-implement-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ZTE-AICloud/Co-OmniSpec (57 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 926 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to mini-design-review, differing in 43 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…