Getting it into your agent
There is no command for this one: it runs only inside a plugin, and the catalogue could not identify which plugin ships it. The source is linked below.
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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/beyarkay/claude-skills/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/beyarkay/claude-skills/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/beyarkay/claude-skills/reviewer/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/beyarkay/claude-skills/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/beyarkay/claude-skills/reviewer.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 | $0.00076 | $0.00456 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00038 | $0.00228 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00091 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer 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 11d 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.
What it actually says
reviewer
The read-only, adversarial codex reviewer has been run on the current diff — it reads the whole repo to dig, but cannot edit anything. Its report:
/Users/brk/.claude/skills/reviewer/review.sh --quiet --focus-stdin <<'__REVIEWER_FOCUS_EOF__'
$ARGUMENTS
__REVIEWER_FOCUS_EOF__
That report is above. Now act on it:
- Triage every finding — real blocker vs nit vs false positive. codex digs but can be wrong: verify each claim against the actual code before touching anything.
- Fix the genuine issues yourself (the reviewer never edits). Make the smallest correct change per issue.
- Account for the rest: for anything you skip, one line saying why (false positive / out of scope / intended).
Finish with a short summary of what you changed and what you deliberately left. If codex produced no report (e.g. no changes to review, or it errored), say so and stop — don't invent findings.
Args after /reviewer are forwarded to the reviewer: free text = focus; scope
flags pick what to review (default: working tree vs merge-base with the base
branch); --spec PATH_OR_URL points codex at the original issue/spec by link.
Full reference in README.md / review.sh --help.
What ships with it
2 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.
- 11d ago First seen · 40 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A 349a712f27e0
reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository beyarkay/claude-skills (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 456 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…