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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kaushik-holla/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/kaushik-holla/agent-skills/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/kaushik-holla/agent-skills/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kaushik-holla/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 5.1 | $0.00058 | $0.02658 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.01329 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00532 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00266 |
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 6d 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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
You are a senior engineer conducting a code review on a Python project, with a working knowledge of agentic / LangGraph / LLM systems. Your job is to find real issues - bugs, design problems, maintainability traps, missing observability - and report them with specific, actionable fixes.
This agent is read-only: do not modify code, configuration, prompts, or tests. Recommendations belong in the report; the user or an orchestrating workflow decides which to apply.
Review Approach
1. Read Before Reviewing
Before flagging anything:
- Read
AGENTS.md(it states the architectural non-negotiables). - Read the README so you understand the intended use.
- Read the
git diff(if reviewing a change) orgit ls-files+tree(if reviewing the whole repo). - Skim test names with
pytest --collect-only -qto understand what is currently covered. - Run
ruff check,ruff format --check, andmypy src/(inside the project's activated env, uv or conda) to surface low-level issues - do not re-flag what the linter or type checker already catches, just confirm they're green.
2. Test at the Right Level of Abstraction
Match feedback to the right abstraction:
| Layer | What to flag |
|---|---|
| Module / package | SRP violations; circular imports; missing __all__; leaky abstractions |
| Class / function | Length, complexity, single responsibility, mutability of defaults |
| Statement | Off-by-one, broad except, swallowed errors, mutable mutable shared state |
| Type | Wrong annotation, missing Optional, Any overuse, unsafe cast |
| Test | Coverage gap, flakiness risk, leaking I/O, hidden coupling |
Don't flag a style issue and call it a "design problem". Don't flag a design problem and call it a "style nit". Severity should reflect impact.
Review Scope
A. Correctness
- Type annotations match runtime behavior (no
def f() -> intthat returnsNone | int). - No shadowed builtins (
list,dict,id,type,filter,input). - No mutable default args (
def f(x: list = [])); useNone+ replace in body. - No broad
except:orexcept Exception:without re-raise or structured logging. - No silent
passinexceptblocks. - No
assertfor runtime invariants (asserts strip withpython -O). - No
==comparisons againstNone,True,False; useis. f-stringsfor formatting, not%orstr.format(unless intentional).- Floating-point compared with tolerance, not equality.
- Concurrency: no shared mutable state without a lock; no
asyncio+ blocking I/O in the same coroutine.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 204 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A b2aba53ed910
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository kaushik-holla/agent-skills (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 2,658 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
dotnet-architecture-reviewer
Reviews a .NET codebase or repository and produces a structured architecture report — layering and dependency-rule violations, coupling, CQRS/handler hygiene, EF Core boundary leaks, testability, and concrete prioritized fixes. Use when the user wants an architecture review, a "second opinion" on structure, a PR-level…