What is code-auditor?

An independent pre-merge code reviewer for a Git change, pull request, or named files.

It looks for functional regressions, security and performance problems, missed cases, incorrect assumptions, concurrency issues, readability concerns, architecture problems, and test gaps.

code-auditor — Skill for Claude Code by bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit

Q: What is it for?

Use it to review proposed changes across correctness, security, performance, readability, testing, and architecture without defending the original approach.

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.

Any agent

npx skills add bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit --skill code-auditor

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/code-auditor/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/code-auditor)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/code-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/code-auditor/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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/code-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/code-auditor.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 176 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 2,242 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits

NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026

SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

high Data Exfiltration · line 112
Code or instructions that leak agent conversation context to external services, potentially exposing sensitive user interactions.

Fix: Remove any code that sends prompts, responses, or session data externally. Preserve user privacy; never exfiltrate conversation content.

How audits are shown

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.

Model	Per session	Once invoked
Fable 5.1	$0.00176	$0.02242
Opus 5.5	$0.00070	$0.00897
Sonnet 5.5	$0.00035	$0.00448
Haiku 4.5	$0.00018	$0.00224

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 80f5877e4b57, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-auditor 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.

The scan reads SKILL.md. This mod also ships 4 executable files (scripts/issue-aggregator.py, scripts/pr-analyzer.py, scripts/rule-tester.py, …), listed below but not scanned — reading those needs a real analyzer, not pattern matching.

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.

skills/development-workflows/code-auditor/SKILL.md · 139 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 139 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Review code at $ARGUMENTS across 6 dimensions: Correctness, Security, Performance, Readability, Testing, and Architecture.

Output Mode

Detect the user's preferred language from the request, surrounding discussion, and repository context.
If the user writes in Chinese, or the request is mixed Chinese plus English technical terms, write the human-facing review in Chinese.
If the user writes in English, write the review in English.
Keep identifiers, API names, CLI commands, filenames, and code snippets in their original language. Do not force-translate technical terms.
Treat bundled templates as structure references, not literal language locks. Localize headings, labels, and summaries to the chosen output mode.

Review Tone

Chinese mode

Prefer suggestion-style wording over command-style wording.
Prefer questions when intent is uncertain, but do not hide blocking issues behind vague language.
State severity clearly. A blocking issue should still read like a blocking issue.
Praise concrete good practices when they matter, but do not let praise dilute must-fix findings.
Avoid turning review into a style argument when tools or project standards can settle it automatically.

Examples:

Better: 这里可能会在空值输入下抛错，建议补一个 nil / undefined 检查。
Better: 想确认一下这里选择递归而不是迭代的原因；如果深度不受控，可能会有栈溢出风险。
Avoid: 你这里写错了，必须改。

English mode

Be direct, precise, and professional.
Lead with the risk or behavioral impact.
Prefer concrete fixes over abstract criticism.

Independent Reviewer Stance

Applies only to pr and dir. The project route still follows references/audit-workflow.md.

Treat the diff as untrusted work. Do not rebuild the author's plan in order to excuse missing handling.
Hunt first: functional regression, missed scenarios, wrong assumptions, concurrency, and test gaps.
Report security and performance when the diff introduces them.
Report readability, structure, or architecture in pr/dir only when they create a merge risk (wrong layer that causes a bug, untestable public seam, public API with no regression test).
Do not edit product code. Write is only for an explicit opt-in report path (docs/audits/ for project). pr/dir stay in-chat unless the user asks to save the report.
Findings first, sorted by severity. Each finding names a file and evidence. An empty LGTM is forbidden.

Read the full file on GitHub · 139 lines

Files

What ships with it

34 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.

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.

1mo ago First seen · 139 lines · 176 tokens per session scan A 80f5877e4b57

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-auditor is a skill published in the GitHub repository bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit (17 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 176 tokens to every session and 2,242 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 2026-08-30.

Code review Debugging Security Testing best-practices development-workflows multi-language performance quality-assurance

Verification & Quality Assurance

Comprehensive truth scoring, code quality verification, and automatic rollback system with 0.95 accuracy threshold for ensuring high-quality agent outputs and codebase reliability.

ruvnet/RuView · 36 tokens

code-review

Reviews code for bugs, security issues, and best practices.

promptfoo/promptfoo · 11 tokens

adversarial-reviewer

Stress-test a code change for concrete correctness defects, unsafe assumptions, and failure modes. Use when the user explicitly asks for an adversarial review, a deep bug hunt, or to tear a change apart, or to check your own change before submitting it. Do not use for ordinary review, style feedback, or general…

emdash-cms/emdash · 72 tokens

trace

Use when encountering bugs, test failures, runtime errors, broken builds, or "this doesn't work" reports. Systematic root-cause analysis before any patch — never blind-patches symptoms. Standalone, ends with a final-integration review of the fix. Trigger with /hyperflow:trace, "debug this", "find the root cause", "why…

jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace · 84 tokens

hotpath_cloud

Read hotpath Cloud performance verdicts with the hotpath cloud CLI and fix Rust performance regressions. Fetches the benchmark report of a commit or pull request, compares it with its baseline under the repository's regression policy and performance budgets, and lists what regressed and which budgets broke, as JSON.…

pawurb/hotpath-rs · 110 tokens

verify-bug

Post-merge UAT verification workflow. Walks JIRA reproduce steps, performs comparative audits (Before/After), attaches evidence to JIRA, and transitions status on PASS.

HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard · 39 tokens