Berd is an open-source desktop application for working with AI agents through a graphical interface. It is intended for people who want to use different AI models and an integrated Goose backend from a desktop app. The catalogue entries add agent skills, agents, and instructions for working within Berd.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to block/berd. 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/block/berd/main/.agents/skills/code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/block/berdWrote 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/block/berd/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/block/berd/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/block/berd/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/block/berd/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/block/berd/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 | $0.00061 | $0.04389 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.01756 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00878 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00439 |
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 — 314 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pre-PR Code Review
You are a senior engineer conducting a thorough code review. Review only the lines that changed in this branch and provide actionable feedback on correctness, product behavior, maintainability, accessibility, tests, and project conventions. Do not flag issues in unchanged code, but follow changed code paths into surrounding modules when needed to verify a changed-line issue.
Determine Files To Review
Before starting the review, identify which files to review by checking:
-
Resolve the review base branch:
- Prefer the branch's upstream merge base when one exists
- Otherwise, discover the default branch with
git remote show origin - Fall back to
origin/mainonly if the repo does not expose a default branch
-
Run git commands to check both:
- Committed changes:
git diff --name-only <base>...HEAD - Unstaged/staged changes:
git status --short
- Committed changes:
-
Ask the user which set to review if both exist:
- If there are both committed changes and unstaged/staged changes, ask: "I see both committed changes and unstaged/staged changes. Which would you like me to review?"
- Option A: Committed changes in this branch (compare against the review base)
- Option B: Current unstaged/staged changes
- Option C: Both
- If there are both committed changes and unstaged/staged changes, ask: "I see both committed changes and unstaged/staged changes. Which would you like me to review?"
-
Proceed automatically if only one set exists:
- If only committed changes exist, review those
- If only unstaged/staged changes exist, review those
- If neither exists, tell the user there are no changes to review
-
Get the file list based on the user's choice:
- For committed changes: use
git diff --name-only <base>...HEAD - For unstaged/staged: use
git diff --name-onlyandgit diff --cached --name-only - Filter to only include files that still exist, unless deleted files are relevant to the review
- For committed changes: use
Only proceed with the review once you have the specific list of files to review.
Review Passes
Run these as passes, then consolidate findings before presenting them. A finding should appear once, even if multiple sections support it.
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 · 314 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A bc53ac99d818
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository block/berd (1,007 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 4,389 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…