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.
npx agentmods add skills/aigentive/ralphx/code-review-checklistnpx skills add aigentive/RalphX --skill code-review-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aigentive/RalphXWhat 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 | $0.00011 | $0.00461 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00230 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00092 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-checklist 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 2d 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
Code Review Checklist
Correctness
- Code does what it's supposed to do
- Edge cases are handled
- Error handling is appropriate
- No off-by-one errors
- Async operations complete properly
Code Quality
Clarity
- Names are descriptive and consistent
- Functions do one thing
- Complex logic has comments
- No dead code or TODOs
Structure
- Appropriate abstractions
- No deep nesting (max 3 levels)
- Functions under 50 lines
- Files under 150 lines
Patterns
- Follows existing patterns
- No reinvented wheels
- DRY principles applied
Testing
- New code has tests
- Edge cases covered
- Tests are meaningful
- Tests pass reliably
Security
Data Handling
- No hardcoded secrets
- Sensitive data not logged
- Input validated at boundaries
Injection Prevention
- SQL queries use parameters
- Commands sanitize input
- URLs are validated
Authentication
- Auth checks present
- Permissions verified
- Session handling correct
Performance
- No obvious N+1 queries
- Expensive operations cached
- No memory leaks
- Efficient algorithms used
Documentation
- Public APIs documented
- Complex logic explained
- README updated if needed
Review Output
Use this template:
## Decision
- [ ] Approve
- [ ] Needs Changes
- [ ] Escalate to Human
## Findings
### Critical (blocks merge)
- [issue description, file:line]
### Important (should fix)
- [issue description, file:line]
### Minor (nice to have)
- [issue description, file:line]
## Summary
[Brief overall assessment]
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 98 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 5becd4d9b801
code-review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository aigentive/RalphX (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 461 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
agent-host-chat-contributions
Build and review cross-cutting agent-host chat behavior through lifecycle contributions. Use when adding turn lifecycle side effects, prompt or context injection, restored-history transformation, protocol-action observation, or when reviewing changes that add code to AgentSideEffects or AgentService.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.