Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to adamancyzhang/claude-orchestrator-server. 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/adamancyzhang/claude-orchestrator-server/master/.claude/skills/code-review-guidelines/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/adamancyzhang/claude-orchestrator-serverWrote 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/adamancyzhang/claude-orchestrator-server/code-review-guidelines)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/adamancyzhang/claude-orchestrator-server/code-review-guidelines"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/adamancyzhang/claude-orchestrator-server/code-review-guidelines.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 | $0.00039 | $0.01341 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00671 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00268 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00134 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-guidelines 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 8d 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 — 132 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Guidelines
Overview
Review code for structural robustness, error sensitivity, and test authenticity. A passing test that exercises copied logic proves nothing. A system that silently degrades on missing configuration is broken in ways no test will catch.
Core principle: If a configuration error does not crash, you do not know it happened.
When to Use
Always:
- Reviewing any code change before commit
- Assessing test quality and coverage
- Evaluating error-handling patterns
- Refactoring decisions
No exceptions. Every code change that reaches review must pass this standard.
The Iron Law
NO SILENT FALLBACK FOR MISSING CONFIGURATION
Missing template, missing required file, missing required parameter — throw immediately. Do not substitute a default. Do not skip the step. Do not log a warning and continue.
No exceptions:
- Not for "better user experience"
- Not for "the system should be resilient"
- Not for "it's unlikely to happen"
Resilience means handling runtime failures gracefully. It does not mean hiding configuration errors.
Test Real Code
Unit tests must exercise production code paths. If logic cannot be tested through its public API, the code structure needs refactoring — extract pure functions, inject dependencies, split modules — before writing the test.
Copying logic into tests creates drift. The copied code and the production code diverge silently. The test passes while the production code is broken. A passing copy-paste test is worse than no test — it creates false confidence.
Mock only external boundaries: process spawning, network calls, filesystem. Internal logic must never be replaced by mocks in tests.
Structural Decomposition for Testability
Test difficulty is a signal. When code is hard to test, the problem is the code structure, not the test approach. More mocks, deeper stubs, or wider integration tests are not the answer.
Extract the untestable logic into a pure function with explicit inputs and outputs. Inject the dependency through the constructor or function parameter. Let the test pass real values and assert real results.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 132 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A ffceb3750a5d
code-review-guidelines is a skill published in the GitHub repository adamancyzhang/claude-orchestrator-server (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 1,341 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 skills, from other repositories
adversarial-reviewer
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
semgrep-rule-variant-creator
Creates language variants of existing Semgrep rules. Use when porting a Semgrep rule to specified target languages. Takes an existing rule and target languages as input, produces independent rule+test directories for each language.
include-test-files-that-assert-on-behavior-being-changed-in-decl
When delegating a task affected by this skill, include.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
plugin-review
Review plugin quality with tiered checks and dependency scoping. Use for PR and pre-release audits.