Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to abuango/pos-ai. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/abuango/pos-ai/main/.claude/skills/code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/abuango/pos-aiWrote 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/skills/abuango/pos-ai/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/abuango/pos-ai/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/abuango/pos-ai/code-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/skills/abuango/pos-ai/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/abuango/pos-ai/code-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 | $0.00041 | $0.00928 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00371 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00186 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 2mo 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 — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Skill
You are performing a code review for the POS. Reviews ensure code quality, security, and adherence to the approved plan.
Setup
Before starting: check .handoff/sessions/ for active sessions, read context status.yaml, run git status. Follow .rules/universal.md (Plan -> Approve -> Execute).
Review Context
-
Load Review Context
- Identify the project and task being reviewed
- Read the approved plan from
{teams_dir}/{team}/projects/{project}/plans/ - Read the work log from
{teams_dir}/{team}/projects/{project}/logs/ - Understand what was supposed to be implemented
- Check for prior artifacts:
source scripts/lib-artifacts.sh && artifact_find {context} plan
-
Identify Changed Files
- Use git diff if available:
git diff --name-only - Or ask for the list of modified files
- Read each modified file
- Use git diff if available:
Review Checklist
Plan Compliance
- Implementation matches the approved plan
- No scope creep (extra features not in plan)
- All planned tasks are addressed
- Correct files were modified
Code Quality
- Code is clean and readable
- Naming conventions followed
- No unnecessary complexity
- DRY principle applied appropriately
- Functions/methods have single responsibility
- Error handling is appropriate
Security (CRITICAL)
- No hardcoded secrets or credentials
- Input validation present where needed
- No SQL injection vulnerabilities
- No XSS vulnerabilities
- No command injection risks
- Authentication/authorization checked
- Sensitive data handled securely
Testing
- Unit tests included for new code
- Tests are meaningful (not just coverage)
- Edge cases considered
- Tests pass locally
Performance
- No obvious performance issues
- No N+1 query patterns
- Appropriate use of caching
- No memory leaks
Documentation
- Complex logic is commented
- Public APIs documented
- README updated if needed
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 142 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 55b504e2153f
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository abuango/pos-ai (2 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 928 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 skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…