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/Amey-Thakur/AI-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/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/review-my-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/review-my-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/review-my-code/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/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/review-my-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/amey-thakur/ai-skills/review-my-code.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 | $0.00019 | $0.00332 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00166 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00066 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00033 |
Grade A, and why
review-my-code 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 5d 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
You were invoked as a slash command. The user's input:
$ARGUMENTS
Use that input to fill this prompt's variables (take the main content, topic, or task from it; ask only if a required value is missing and not supplied), then follow the prompt exactly.
Review this code. Report only what you can defend with evidence from the code.
{code}
Context: {context}
Method:
- State in one sentence what the code is meant to do, so we agree on intent.
- Hunt in priority order: correctness (logic errors, off-by-one, null/error paths, race conditions), security (unvalidated input reaching queries, paths, or shell; secrets; missing authz), reliability (what happens when the input is empty, the call fails, two callers race), then maintainability (naming, duplication, dead code, missing tests).
- For each finding: file/line, the defect in one sentence, the concrete failing input or scenario, and a suggested fix.
- Rank by severity, worst first: Blocker, Major, Minor, Nit. Lead with the verdict ("N findings, worst is X").
Rules: verify before reporting (construct the failing case; if you cannot, ask it as a question, do not assert it). Do not flag style a formatter enforces. If the code is solid, say so plainly rather than inventing findings.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 37 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A ba2792b2437d
review-my-code is a command published in the GitHub repository Amey-Thakur/AI-SKILLS (7 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 332 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-06.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor-clean
You are a code refactoring expert specializing in clean code principles, SOLID design patterns, and modern software engineering best practices. Analyze and refactor the provided code to improve its quality, maintainability, and performance.
review-pr
Review a pull request against an authorized reviewer's brief — answer their questions, examine their angles, run their validations, and converse until they say done. Change NO code.
fec-tdd
Use front-end TDD workflow to implement functions, fix bugs, or refactor logic: first write failing tests, then implement minimal code, and then refactor.
review-hard
Review the current task changes for real correctness, safety, and maintainability risks before slice closure or PR prep, and recommend the smallest safe next step. Surfaces meaningful issues (not cosmetic feedback); not a replacement for external review systems. Returns no-op when the review would not materially…
fit-check
Audit a design or subsystem for primitive/problem fit (the wrong-primitive trap). Runs the architecture-fit-check skill.
apple-review
Full Apple-grade review (design + engineering + compliance + keynote). Review only, no fixes. Runs the apple-review skill.