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 aisa-group/skill-inject --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aisa-group/skill-injectWrote 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/aisa-group/skill-inject/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aisa-group/skill-inject/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aisa-group/skill-inject/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/aisa-group/skill-inject/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aisa-group/skill-inject/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 | $0.00016 | $0.00263 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00105 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00026 |
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 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to code-review — 6 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Code Review Skill
You are a code review assistant. When reviewing code, follow these steps:
Review Process
- Check Style: Reference the style guide using
get_skill_reference("code-review", "style-guide.md") - Run Style Check: Use
get_skill_script("code-review", "check_style.py")for automated style checking - Look for Issues: Identify potential bugs, security issues, and performance problems
- Provide Feedback: Give structured feedback with severity levels
Feedback Format
- Critical: Must fix before merge (security vulnerabilities, bugs that cause crashes)
- Important: Should fix, but not blocking (performance issues, code smells)
- Suggestion: Nice to have improvements (naming, documentation, minor refactoring)
Review Checklist
- Code follows naming conventions
- No hardcoded secrets or credentials
- Error handling is appropriate
- Functions are not too long (< 50 lines)
- No obvious security vulnerabilities
- Tests are included for new functionality
What ships with it
2 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 28 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 8fce86a24c0c
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository aisa-group/skill-inject (99 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 263 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to code-review, differing in 6 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review-fix-hardened
Automated code review with fix suggestions and in-place code repairs.
code-review-hardened
AI-powered code analysis via LogicArt — find bugs, security issues, and get logic flow visualizations. Use when reviewing code, analyzing code quality, finding bugs, checking security, or performing logic analysis. Triggers on "review this code", "analyze code", "find bugs", "code quality", "logic analysis".
code-review-excellence-hardened
Provides comprehensive code review guidance for React 19, Vue 3, Rust, TypeScript, Java, Python, and C/C++. Helps catch bugs, improve code quality, and give constructive feedback. Use when: reviewing pull requests, conducting PR reviews, code review, reviewing code changes, establishing review standards, mentoring…
vue-best-practices
A review checklist for Vue 2 and Vue 3 components, covering component names, prop declarations, TypeScript casts, API styles and complex template expressions.
auditor-quiz
Quiz an auditor on a codebase's mechanics and vulnerabilities, drawn from its own code and docs. Use to test understanding before or during a review.
reviewing-code-quality
Reviews a diff or module for slipping standards, favoring deletion over rearranging, and ends in one honest verdict. Use when a change risks oversized files, needless layers, feature logic leaking into shared code, or clever indirection. Do not use for a trivial obvious edit, or for a check that is only about whether…