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 ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE --skill code-review-assistantgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SEWrote 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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/code-review-assistant)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/code-review-assistant"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/code-review-assistant/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/arabelatso/skills-4-se/code-review-assistant"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/arabelatso/skills-4-se/code-review-assistant.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00125 | $0.02773 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00063 | $0.01386 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00025 | $0.00555 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00277 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-assistant 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 9d 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 — 526 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Assistant
Overview
Perform thorough, constructive code reviews that identify issues, suggest improvements, and ensure code quality, security, and maintainability.
Review Categories
Examine code across these dimensions:
1. 🐛 Correctness & Bugs
- Logic errors
- Edge case handling
- Null/undefined checks
- Type mismatches
- Off-by-one errors
- Race conditions
2. 🔒 Security
- Input validation
- SQL injection risks
- XSS vulnerabilities
- Authentication/authorization flaws
- Sensitive data exposure
- Insecure dependencies
3. ⚡ Performance
- Algorithm efficiency (O(n) complexity)
- Memory leaks
- Unnecessary computations
- Database query optimization
- Caching opportunities
4. 🏗️ Code Quality
- Readability and clarity
- Naming conventions
- Code duplication (DRY principle)
- Function/method length
- Complexity (cyclomatic)
- SOLID principles
5. ✅ Testing
- Test coverage
- Edge case testing
- Unit vs integration tests
- Test quality and clarity
- Mock usage appropriateness
6. 📚 Documentation
- Code comments quality
- API documentation
- Function/method docstrings
- Complex logic explanation
- README updates
Review Workflow
Step 1: Understand Context
Gather information:
- What's the purpose of this code?
- What problem does it solve?
- What's the scope of changes?
- Are there related files to consider?
For PRs:
# View PR diff
gh pr diff <PR-NUMBER>
# View PR description
gh pr view <PR-NUMBER>
# See changed files
git diff --name-only main..HEAD
Step 2: Read the Code
First pass - high level:
- Overall structure and organization
- Naming consistency
- Code patterns used
- Separation of concerns
Second pass - detailed:
- Line-by-line logic verification
- Edge cases and error handling
- Performance considerations
- Security implications
Step 3: Identify Issues
Categorize findings by severity:
🔴 Critical: Must fix before merge
- Security vulnerabilities
- Data loss risks
- System crashes
- Breaking 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 526 lines · 125 tokens per session scan A f7f5b1b1116e
code-review-assistant is a skill published in the GitHub repository ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE (251 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 125 tokens to every session and 2,773 once invoked, about $0.0006 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review-web
Review web application code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and stack-specific anti-patterns. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review code, debug a production issue, investigate a build failure, audit security, or check a PR before merging. Triggers on code review, review my code, debug…
refactor-advisor
A code review helper that finds common design and maintenance problems in a codebase and suggests ways to restructure the code.
pair-programming
A coding partner that writes code and then reviews that code for correctness, security, speed, readability, and reliability. It focuses on issues that can appear in AI-generated code, such as invented APIs or quietly changed requirements.
apply-findings
Apply findings by making the suggested code changes. Applies accepted verdicts, escalates ambiguous findings to the user, and offers to note genuine improvements for later. Use when the user asks to "apply findings", "apply fixes", "apply suggestions", "apply accepted findings", "fix the findings", or "apply the…
java-code-review
Review Java code for bugs, duplicate code, correctness risks, maintainability improvements, and missing tests. By default review files modified in git; when the user explicitly names files, classes, packages, or a diff, review that scope instead. Generate a detailed review.md report with actionable comments and fixes.
simplify-all
Run the code and documentation simplification passes together over one scope, launching every review agent concurrently before applying a single round of fixes. Use when the user asks to "simplify all", "simplify everything", "simplify code and docs", "clean up code and docs", "run both simplify skills", or "simplify…