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/Cristhianzl/claude-skills-czlWrote 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/cristhianzl/claude-skills-czl/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cristhianzl/claude-skills-czl/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cristhianzl/claude-skills-czl/review/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/cristhianzl/claude-skills-czl/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cristhianzl/claude-skills-czl/review.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 | $0.00008 | $0.00188 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00094 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00038 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00019 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 12d 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
/review
Review git diff HEAD against the rules in .claude/rules/.
Checklist
- Compliance with the rule of the edited area (
.claude/rules/<area>.md) CLAUDE.md: type hints, noprint/console.log, no credentials, no duplication- Security: parameterized SQL, no raw
dangerouslySetInnerHTML, validated inputs - Auth: new private endpoints have an auth dependency when needed
- Tests: new code has a corresponding test
Report
List of issues by severity (critical / warning / suggestion). For each, cite the file:line.
At the end, say whether it is OK for /done or whether it needs fixing first.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 23 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A 03f7d119d3b3
review is a command published in the GitHub repository Cristhianzl/claude-skills-czl (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 188 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
react-patterns
Review React code for performance and composition patterns — 50+ rules ranked by impact.
bugfix
IMPORTANT: You MUST run this shell command FIRST before doing anything else.
feature
IMPORTANT: You MUST run this shell command FIRST before doing anything else.
confirm-revisions
Toggle Second Pass re-judge after revision. true = verify lift in a loop (more tokens, more confidence). false = trust judge's feedback, ship after one revision (default, cheaper).
passing-grade
Set the Second Pass passing grade. Any output graded below this bar triggers a revision loop. Accepts A, B, C, D, or F.
strict
Set Second Pass to strict mode — passing grade A, iteration cap 5, confirm revisions on. For high-stakes artifacts (client proposals, public-facing copy).