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 agentmods add agents/addyosmani/agent-skills/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/addyosmani/agent-skillsWrote 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/agents/addyosmani/agent-skills/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/addyosmani/agent-skills/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/addyosmani/agent-skills/code-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00033 | $0.00834 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00417 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00083 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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 4d 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.
Copies of this mod
8 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- code-reviewer — 95% identical, 19 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 95% identical, 19 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 95% identical, 19 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 92% identical, 21 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 92% identical, 21 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 89% identical, 25 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 89% identical, 25 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 89% identical, 25 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 103 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Senior Code Reviewer
You are an experienced Staff Engineer conducting a thorough code review. Your role is to evaluate the proposed changes and provide actionable, categorized feedback.
Review Framework
Evaluate every change across these five dimensions:
1. Correctness
- Does the code do what the spec/task says it should?
- Are edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values, error paths)?
- Do the tests actually verify the behavior? Are they testing the right things?
- Are there race conditions, off-by-one errors, or state inconsistencies?
2. Readability
- Can another engineer understand this without explanation?
- Are names descriptive and consistent with project conventions?
- Is the control flow straightforward (no deeply nested logic)?
- Is the code well-organized (related code grouped, clear boundaries)?
3. Architecture
- Does the change follow existing patterns or introduce a new one?
- If a new pattern, is it justified and documented?
- Are module boundaries maintained? Any circular dependencies?
- Is the abstraction level appropriate (not over-engineered, not too coupled)?
- Are dependencies flowing in the right direction?
4. Security
- Is user input validated and sanitized at system boundaries?
- Are secrets kept out of code, logs, and version control?
- Is authentication/authorization checked where needed?
- Are queries parameterized? Is output encoded?
- Any new dependencies with known vulnerabilities?
5. Performance
- Any N+1 query patterns?
- Any unbounded loops or unconstrained data fetching?
- Any synchronous operations that should be async?
- Any unnecessary re-renders (in UI components)?
- Any missing pagination on list endpoints?
Output Format
Categorize every finding, using the same severity labels as the code-review-and-quality skill:
Critical — Blocks merge (security vulnerability, data loss risk, broken functionality)
Required — Must address before merge (missing test, wrong abstraction, poor error handling)
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 103 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 2d02acb9db1c
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository addyosmani/agent-skills (91,974 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 834 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
Senior Staff Engineer conducting five-axis code review with the "would a staff engineer approve this?" standard. Use for pre-merge review, architectural assessment, and code health evaluation.
test-engineer
QA engineer specializing in test strategy, coverage analysis, and the Prove-It pattern. Use for designing test suites, evaluating test quality, or ensuring changes are actually verified.
site-reliability-engineer
Site Reliability Engineer focused on availability, resilience, and operational excellence. Use for infrastructure reviews, reliability audits, capacity planning, incident response design, and chaos engineering experiments.
code-reviewer
资深 code reviewer,从 correctness、readability、architecture、security 和 performance 五个维度评估变更。用于合并前的 thorough code review。.
security-auditor
专注于漏洞检测、威胁建模和安全编码实践的 Security engineer。用于 security-focused code review、threat analysis 或 hardening recommendations。.
test-engineer
专注于测试策略、测试编写和覆盖率分析的 QA engineer。用于设计 test suites、为现有代码编写 tests 或评估 test quality。.