Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile/main/.github/skills/code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bcgov/bc-wallet-mobileWrote 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/bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile/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/bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile/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 | $0.00029 | $0.00598 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00239 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00120 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00060 |
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 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 — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewing a pull request
This is a wallet holding people's real credentials. A defect that corrupts wallet state or leaks personal data costs a holder far more than a style nit costs the team. Review accordingly.
Procedure
-
Read What should the reviewer focus on first. It names where the author is least certain. Start there. If it says the change is trivial and the diff agrees, a short review is the correct review.
-
Check the blast radius. Credential create/store/delete, onboarding, PIN, biometrics, native modules, or IAS and mediator calls — read every changed line. Everything else is usually a skim.
-
Review by priority below, stopping when you have enough to be useful. Four real findings beat twenty observations.
-
Summarise by ordering the changed files by review risk, one line each. This is the most valuable part — it tells the human where to spend attention before they open the diff.
Priorities
- Wallet state — can this leave the wallet unrecoverable? Partial writes, no rollback on a failed exchange, assuming a credential survives an await.
- PII — personal data, tokens, credential attributes, and whole request/response bodies must not reach a log, an analytics event, or a user-visible error. Remote logging makes it permanent.
- iOS/Android divergence — behaviour changing on one platform only. Hides in native modules, permissions, camera, biometrics. Say which platform looks untested.
- Accessibility —
TouchableOpacity/PressableneedaccessibilityLabel,accessibilityRole,hitSlop,testID. Text must be localised, without layout\n. - Error handling — errors surface, never swallowed. API hooks throw; service
and UI hooks catch. Deleting something absent should succeed. Native errors go
through
throwNativeError/toNativeAppError. - Architecture — new work is MVVM; existing work follows the file it's in.
Leave alone
Formatting and import order (Prettier and ESLint own those), naming preferences, behaviour-preserving restructuring, coverage percentages, missing tests for code the PR didn't add, lockfiles and dependency bumps, and anything the author already flagged as known.
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 · 59 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 40a4a365ef80
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository bcgov/bc-wallet-mobile (85 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 598 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
app-store-review
Evaluates code against Apple's App Store Review Guidelines. Use this skill when reviewing iOS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS, or visionOS app code (Swift, Objective-C, React Native, or Expo) to identify potential App Store rejection issues before submission. Triggers on tasks involving app review preparation, compliance…
swift-concurrency-pro
Reviews Swift code for concurrency correctness, modern API usage, and common async/await pitfalls. Use when reading, writing, or reviewing Swift concurrency code.
swiftui-pro
Comprehensively reviews SwiftUI code for best practices on modern APIs, maintainability, and performance. Use when reading, writing, or reviewing SwiftUI projects.
axiom-audit-camera
Use this agent to scan Swift code for camera, video, and audio capture issues including deprecated APIs, missing interruption handlers, threading violations, and permission anti-patterns.
mobile-platform-offline-validate
Review a Lightning Web Component for mobile offline compatibility — the Komaci offline static analyzer that pre-primes the data graph for Salesforce Mobile App Plus and Field Service Mobile App. Produces a finding list with code-level fixes covering inline GraphQL queries in @wire configurations, modern lwc:if /…
mobiai-review-code
Use when reviewing mobile code changes — check for lifecycle issues, memory leaks, thread safety, and platform-specific pitfalls.