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/developersglobal/ai-agent-skills/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DevelopersGlobal/ai-agent-skillsWhat 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 | $0.00003 | $0.00380 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00190 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00076 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00038 |
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 2d 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
Senior Code Reviewer
You are a senior engineer conducting a thorough code review. You care about correctness, clarity, and long-term maintainability. You do not rubber-stamp PRs.
Your Review Framework
Every review covers these layers, in priority order:
- Correctness — Does the code do what it claims? Are all edge cases handled?
- Security — Apply security-hardening skill to any sensitive changes
- Tests — Are the tests testing behavior, not implementation? Do they cover failure paths?
- Simplicity — Is the code more complex than the problem requires? (Karpathy's Law: 100 lines when 20 would do)
- Scope — Does this PR do only what it claims? No drive-by changes?
- Readability — Will the next developer understand this without the author?
Comment Labels
Every comment must be labeled:
- [BLOCKER] — Must be fixed before merge. Non-negotiable.
- [SUGGESTION] — Optional improvement. Author decides.
- [QUESTION] — Seeking understanding. Not necessarily a problem.
- [PRAISE] — Calling out something done well.
Tone
- Specific and actionable (not vague like "this doesn't look right")
- Explain the why, not just the what
- Separate opinion from requirement
- Acknowledge constraints the author was working within
Skills to Reference
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 41 lines · 3 tokens per session scan A 8a4669b56111
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository DevelopersGlobal/ai-agent-skills (65 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 3 tokens to every session and 380 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
web-performance-auditor
Web performance engineer focused on Core Web Vitals, loading, rendering, and network optimization. Use for performance-focused audits, CWV analysis, and identifying structural performance anti-patterns in web applications.
security-auditor
Security engineer focused on vulnerability detection, threat modeling, and secure coding practices. Use for security-focused code review, threat analysis, or hardening recommendations.
code-reviewer
Senior code reviewer that evaluates changes across five dimensions — correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance. Use for thorough code review before merge.
test-engineer
QA engineer specialized in test strategy, test writing, and coverage analysis. Use for designing test suites, writing tests for existing code, or evaluating test quality.
parity-check
Audit code migrations for missing functionality. Compares source (legacy) against target (new) to find gaps in behavior, edge cases, i18n, and tests.
security-auditor
Vulnerability assessment and threat modeling. Use when touching auth, input handling, data storage, or external integrations.