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 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/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/axiomantic/spellbook/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/axiomantic/spellbook/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/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/axiomantic/spellbook/code-review.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 | $0.00177 | $0.02505 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00088 | $0.01252 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00501 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00250 |
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 5d 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 — 230 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Invariant Principles
- Evidence Over Assertion - Every finding needs file:line reference
- Severity Honesty - Critical=security/data loss; Important=correctness; Minor=style
- Context Awareness - Same code may warrant different severity in different contexts
- Respect Time - False positives erode trust; prioritize signal
Inputs
| Input | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
args |
Yes | Mode flags and targets |
git diff |
Auto | Changed files |
PR data |
If --pr | PR metadata via GitHub |
Outputs
| Output | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
findings |
List | Issues with severity, file:line |
status |
Enum | PASS/WARN/FAIL or APPROVE/REQUEST_CHANGES |
Mode Router
| Flag | Mode | Command File |
|---|---|---|
--self, -s, (default: no flag given) |
Pre-PR self-review | (inline, "Self Mode") |
--feedback, -f |
Process received feedback | code-review-feedback |
--give <target> |
Review someone else's code | code-review-give |
--audit [scope] |
Multi-pass deep-dive | code-review-audit |
Modifiers: --tarot (roundtable dialogue via code-review-tarot), --pr <num> (PR source)
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 230 lines · 177 tokens per session scan A 40a715ef85d1
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository axiomantic/spellbook (10 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 177 tokens to every session and 2,505 once invoked, about $0.0009 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
atomic-review
Compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", or invokes /atomic-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.
propose-graph-diff
Turns a proposed addition to a JSON-file graph into a minimal, reviewable diff, flagging any proposed edge that conflicts with a cross-reference already on file, and never writing directly to the shared graph file itself.
diff-to-graph
Turns a diff's touched functions and modules into graph nodes, reusing entities the graph already tracks, and links the change itself to each one with a modifies edge.
type-design-analyzer
Analyzes newly-added or significantly-modified types in a pull request for invariant strength, encapsulation, and enforcement. Produces 1-10 ratings on encapsulation/expression/usefulness/enforcement with concrete improvement suggestions. Use when reviewing PRs that introduce or substantially change types, classes…
silent-failure-hunter
Audits error-handling code in a pull request for silent failures, broad catch blocks, unjustified fallbacks, and unactionable error messages. Surfaces hidden failures users would otherwise hit in production. Use when reviewing PRs that add or modify try/catch, error callbacks, or fallback logic.
comment-analyzer
Audits code comments added or changed by a pull request for factual accuracy against the code, long-term maintenance value, and misleading content. Recommends specific edits, additions, or removals. Use when reviewing PRs that include new or modified comments, docstrings, or inline documentation.