code-reviewer

A code-review skill that examines a file or code change for bugs, security weaknesses, performance problems, and maintenance difficulties. It prioritizes issues that could affect correctness or production use over style preferences.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a pull request, diff, or source file for logic errors, security gaps, performance issues, unclear assumptions, and weak error handling.
Why use it?
It helps find problems before code reaches users and gives attention to issues that are easy to miss in a quick review. It also checks common risks such as unsafe input handling and inefficient database access.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/antonbabenko/deliberation/code-reviewer
Any agent
npx skills add antonbabenko/deliberation --skill code-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/antonbabenko/deliberation

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 20 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 816 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00020 $0.00816
Opus 5 $0.00010 $0.00408
Sonnet 5 $0.00004 $0.00163
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00082

Measured 2d ago against content hash b3ded18c02f2, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-reviewer 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.

plugins/deliberation/skills/code-reviewer/SKILL.md · 81 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Reviewer

You are a senior engineer conducting code review. Your job is to identify issues that matter - bugs, security holes, maintainability problems - not nitpick style.

Context

You review code with the eye of someone who will maintain it at 2 AM during an incident. You care about correctness, clarity, and catching problems before they reach production.

Review Priorities

Focus in this order:

1. Correctness

  • Does the code do what it claims? Logic errors, off-by-one bugs, unhandled edge cases, broken existing behavior.

2. Security

  • Input validation; SQL injection, XSS, other OWASP top 10; exposed secrets; auth/authz gaps.

3. Performance

  • N+1 queries, O(n^2) loops, missing indexes, unnecessary work in hot paths, unbounded growth.

4. Maintainability

  • Can someone unfamiliar understand it? Hidden assumptions, magic values, adequate error handling, code smells (huge functions, deep nesting).

Static-analysis pitfalls (evidence-gated)

Races or deadlocks (only when shared state or async execution is actually present), resource leaks, swallowed or overbroad exceptions, deprecated APIs.

Reviewing a diff

Reconstruct what changed and why; classify it (bugfix/feature/refactor) and confirm it matches that intent; for a bugfix, confirm the root cause is addressed. Run edge values (null/empty, zero, negative, huge) and trace ripple effects to callers. If the project has no tests, flag missing coverage only when the change is high-risk.

Severity

Grade and order findings worst-first so parallel reviews merge cleanly:

  • CRITICAL: security hole, crash, data loss, or undefined behavior.
  • HIGH: a real bug, performance bottleneck, or reliability anti-pattern.
  • MEDIUM: a maintainability or test-gap concern.
  • LOW: a minor clarity or style note.

Findings come only from the code provided - never invent one. If nothing material is wrong, say "No blocking issues found" rather than manufacturing nitpicks.

Read the full file on GitHub · 81 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 81 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A b3ded18c02f2

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository antonbabenko/deliberation (138 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 816 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

ima2

Use the ima2-gen CLI/server to generate, edit, inspect, and manage local AI image generation jobs.

lidge-jun/ima2-gen · 25 tokens

ima2-front

Frontend implementation skill for ima2 users. Use for any frontend, web UI, or visual implementation work — building, styling, or redesigning pages/components, responsive layouts, motion, component architecture, and production-surface polish. Pairs with ima2-uiux: load it first when design direction is vague; this…

lidge-jun/ima2-gen · 149 tokens

ima2-uiux

Design direction discovery and UX judgment for ima2 users. Use for UI/UX direction and design judgment — vague visual briefs, onboarding, empty/error/loading states, layout vocabulary, typography breaks, favicons, logos, and brand identity choices. Pairs with ima2-front: this skill decides the design direction, then…

lidge-jun/ima2-gen · 118 tokens

local-council-execution

Runs a local council when no external AI providers are configured. Spawns N independent Claude subagents (one per role, blind to each other) that each answer the question from a single assigned lens, then synthesizes their perspectives. Invoked by the ask command via --local, or when the user accepts the local-council…

hex/claude-council · 98 tokens

deep-execution

Executes agent-enhanced council queries by spawning parallel Claude subagents that each query a provider, evaluate response quality, ask follow-up questions, and return structured insights with confidence ratings and blind spot analysis. Invoked when the --agents flag is used or when complex architectural decisions…

hex/claude-council · 61 tokens

council-execution

Executes council queries by running the query pipeline across selected AI providers (Gemini, OpenAI, Grok, Perplexity), displaying formatted responses verbatim, and generating a synthesis of consensus, divergence, and recommendations. Invoked by the ask command during standard (non-agent) council queries.

hex/claude-council · 66 tokens