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 skills add aiocean/claude-plugins --skill aio-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aiocean/claude-pluginsWrote 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/aiocean/claude-plugins/aio-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aiocean/claude-plugins/aio-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aiocean/claude-plugins/aio-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/aiocean/claude-plugins/aio-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aiocean/claude-plugins/aio-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 | $0.00139 | $0.03088 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00056 | $0.01235 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00618 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00309 |
Grade A, and why
aio-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 1mo 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 — 177 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
A CL (changelist) is one self-contained change under review — equivalent to a PR / MR. LGTM = "Looks Good to Me" (reviewer's approval). Nit: = optional polish, won't block.
This skill does two things:
- Runs a review — authors and runs an adaptive review workflow over a diff/PR (the default when there's code in front of you). See Run a review below.
- Coaches a role — the reviewer / author playbook. It's both the rubric the workflow's agents apply and your reference for reviewing by hand.
Full principles and rationale: references/01-overview.md.
Pick the lane first
| User signal | Lane | Start with |
|---|---|---|
| "review this PR / check my diff / is this safe to merge" (code is present) | Run a review | the workflow below |
| "how should I review / what do I look for / should I approve" (no diff, wants guidance) | Reviewer playbook | the 8-point checklist below |
| "writing a PR description / split my change / respond to review comments" | Author playbook | the author sections below |
| "is this an emergency / can we skip review" | either | the emergency section + references/02-emergencies.md |
| Unclear | ask once; default Run a review if a diff exists, else Reviewer | — |
Run a review — the workflow
When there's actual code to review, don't eyeball it — run the adaptive review workflow. It profiles the project, reviews on two independent tracks, then kills its own false positives before giving a verdict:
- Profile (3 agents in parallel) — understand the project · detect the lint/type-check/test tooling it actually configures · extract the house conventions and design patterns. These are independent discovery tasks, so they fan out, not run in sequence.
- Mechanical — run the tools the profile found (linters, type-checkers, tests) and parse their output into findings scoped to the diff.
- Semantic — a multi-lens sweep applying the 8-dimension rubric below plus the discovered house conventions, so the review enforces this codebase's style, not generic advice.
- Consolidate — dedup both tracks, adversarially verify each finding against the real code (linters and LLMs both emit noise — a false positive erodes trust more than a missed nit), severity-rank, and synthesize an LGTM verdict against The Standard.
What ships with it
12 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.
- references/01-overview.md 2.4 KB
- references/02-emergencies.md 3.0 KB
- references/author-01-cl-descriptions.md 7.5 KB
- references/author-02-small-cls.md 11 KB
- references/author-03-handling-comments.md 4.2 KB
- references/review-workflow.md 14 KB
- references/reviewer-01-standard.md 5.4 KB
- references/reviewer-02-what-to-look-for.md 11 KB
- references/reviewer-03-navigating-cl.md 3.9 KB
- references/reviewer-04-speed.md 6.8 KB
- references/reviewer-05-writing-comments.md 4.2 KB
- references/reviewer-06-handling-pushback.md 4.2 KB
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 177 lines · 139 tokens per session scan A 46487b908491
aio-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository aiocean/claude-plugins (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 139 tokens to every session and 3,088 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
eval-skills
Audit a project or library of skills for metadata, trigger boundaries, workflow completion criteria, local resource closure, instruction economy, tool scope, effort, and routing evidence. Use before shipping skills, after importing a skill collection, or when a skill triggers too often or not at all.
pr-triage
4-phase PR backlog management with audit, deep code review, validated comments, and optional worktree setup. Use when triaging pull requests, catching up on pending code reviews, or managing a backlog of open PRs. Args: 'all' to review all, PR numbers to focus (e.g. '42 57'), 'en'/'fr' for language, no arg = audit…
audit-agents-skills
Audit Claude Code agents, skills, and commands for quality and production readiness. Use when evaluating skill quality, checking production readiness scores, or comparing agents against best-practice templates.
design-patterns
Detect, suggest, and evaluate GoF design patterns in TypeScript/JavaScript codebases. Use when refactoring code, applying singleton/factory/observer/strategy patterns, reviewing pattern quality, or finding stack-native alternatives for React, Angular, NestJS, and Vue.
eval-rules
Audit Claude Code instruction rules in .claude/rules/ and /.claude/rules/: frontmatter, paths glob validity against real files, symlink load status, and day-to-day usefulness, then update rules with the user. Use for first-time rules setup, rules that apply too often or never, or periodic rules hygiene. Not for Codex…
review-pr
Perform a comprehensive code review of a pull request.