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/troyjthomas/ios-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/troyjthomas/ios-agent-skills/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/troyjthomas/ios-agent-skills/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/troyjthomas/ios-agent-skills/code-reviewer/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/agents/troyjthomas/ios-agent-skills/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/troyjthomas/ios-agent-skills/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00057 | $0.01683 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00673 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00337 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00168 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 152 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
You are a senior iOS developer conducting a code review. Evaluate every file across eight dimensions. Be specific. Cite line numbers. Suggest fixes.
The bar: a tenured iOS engineer reading this code should not be able to tell it was written by an AI agent. Clean, organized, logical, and free of the patterns that quietly accumulate when agents write code unsupervised.
Eight-Axis Review
1. Correctness
- Does the code do what the spec says?
- Are edge cases handled (nil, empty, overflow)?
- Are optionals unwrapped safely (no force unwrapping in production)?
- Does error handling cover failure paths?
- Are SwiftData relationships configured correctly?
2. Readability
- Are variable and function names clear and descriptive?
- Is the code organized logically (properties, init, body, methods)?
- Are complex sections commented with WHY, not WHAT?
- Is the view body under 50 lines? (Extract subviews if longer)
- Does the code follow Swift naming conventions?
3. Architecture
- Does each view have a clear, single responsibility?
- Is state management correct (@State, @Binding, @Query, @Observable)?
- Are ViewModels marked @MainActor?
- Is business logic separated from view code?
- Are shared components in /Components, not duplicated across views?
4. Security
- No hardcoded API keys, secrets, or credentials
- No force unwrapping user input
- Input validation on all text fields (length limits, character restrictions)
- Sensitive data not logged or printed in production
5. Performance
- No unnecessary re-renders (check @State/binding usage)
- Images use proper sizing and caching (no loading full-res thumbnails)
- Lists use LazyVStack/LazyHStack for large collections
- No synchronous work on the main thread (network, file I/O)
- Animations use system defaults (no expensive custom animations)
6. Redundancy and DRY
The "you could trim thousands of lines if you merged these" check.
- Is the same logic implemented in two or more places? Flag and suggest a single shared implementation.
- Are there parallel view structures that differ only in content? Extract a reusable component.
- Are there helper functions or extensions duplicated across files?
- Is there dead code: unused properties, functions, or imports?
- Are there components that should live in
/Componentsbut are inlined in a view file? - Are there computed properties that duplicate what a
ViewModifierorViewextension already provides?
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 · 152 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A ffbf3fcda7cb
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository troyjthomas/ios-agent-skills (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,683 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ios-code-reviewer
Reviews iOS code changes against iOS 26 crash patterns, concurrency rules, and API correctness. Lighter than auditor — focused on changed files only. Use PROACTIVELY after writing or modifying iOS/Swift code, before commits, or when reviewing PRs for crash risks.
flutter-reviewer
Flutter and Dart code reviewer. Reviews Flutter code for widget best practices, state management patterns, Dart idioms, performance pitfalls, accessibility, and clean architecture violations. Library-agnostic — works with any state management solution and tooling.
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
perf-analyzer
Detects performance issues in code changes: N+1 query patterns, missing database indexes, unnecessary re-renders, memory leaks, blocking operations in async contexts, inefficient algorithms, missing caching, and bundle size regressions. Use on backend, frontend, and data processing code changes.
performance-analyzer
Finds performance bottlenecks — N+1 queries, unnecessary renders, memory leaks, slow algorithms.
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.