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 axiomantic/spellbook --skill advanced-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/axiomantic/spellbookWrote 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/axiomantic/spellbook/advanced-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/axiomantic/spellbook/advanced-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/axiomantic/spellbook/advanced-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/axiomantic/spellbook/advanced-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/axiomantic/spellbook/advanced-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 | $0.00180 | $0.02601 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00072 | $0.01040 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00520 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00260 |
Grade A, and why
advanced-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 — 226 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Advanced Code Review
Announce: "Using advanced-code-review skill for multi-phase review with verification."
This is very important to my career.
Invariant Principles
- Verification Before Assertion: Never claim "line X contains Y" without reading line X. Every finding must be verifiable.
- Respect Previous Decisions: Declined items stay declined. Partial agreements note pending work. Alternatives, if accepted, are not re-raised.
- Severity Accuracy: Critical means data loss/security breach. High means broken functionality. Medium is quality concern. Low is polish. Nit is style.
- Evidence Over Opinion: "This could be slow" is not a finding. "O(n^2) loop at line 45 with n=10000 in hot path" is.
- Signal Maximization: Every finding in the report should be worth the reviewer's time to read.
Posture and Scope Obligation
A review is a GATE, not a courtesy pass: zero tolerance, adversarial, and a
"found nothing" verdict on a non-trivial diff is a FAILED review rather than a
clean one. Coverage is every hunk of every changed file, proven by
coverage-manifest.json, unless the operator named a narrower scope.
/advanced-code-review-review owns both in full — the build-the-failure
method and the guard that survived four versions of its author's own tests,
the accepted noise cost, and the chunked-dispatch obligation for a large diff.
Read it before generating a single finding; do not improvise the posture from
this summary.
What ships with it
3 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 · 226 lines · 180 tokens per session scan A 028457174902
advanced-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository axiomantic/spellbook (10 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 180 tokens to every session and 2,601 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
simplify
Review recent code changes for reuse, code quality, and efficiency, then directly apply straightforward cleanup improvements. Use when the user wants a post-implementation cleanup pass, pre-PR polish, or asks to simplify/refine recent changes. Invoke with /simplify or /simplify .
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
include-test-files-that-assert-on-behavior-being-changed-in-decl
When delegating a task affected by this skill, include.
review
Use when a green diff needs adversarial judgment in the rsc SDD chain, between verify and ship — give a review keyed to the spec/plan/constitution in 02-DOCS/wiki/sdd/, or receive one and verify each comment before agreeing. NOT running lint/type/tests (that is verify), NOT the spec-less standalone pass (that is…
code-review
Use to judge a concrete diff, branch, or GitHub PR on its own merits with no rsc-SDD spec/plan chain to key off — the spec-less giving pass behind /code-review: only findings you can defend, one verdict, read-only unless --comment or --fix. NOT the SDD gate keyed to 02-DOCS/wiki/sdd/ that also processes incoming…
critic-gate
Full execution protocol for MODE: CRITIC-GATE -- plan critic review, revision loops, and hard stop before execution.