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 catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow --skill review-cyclegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-WorkflowWrote 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/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/review-cycle)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/review-cycle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/review-cycle/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/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/review-cycle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/catlog22/claude-code-workflow/review-cycle.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 | $0.00063 | $0.01446 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00578 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00289 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00145 |
Grade A, and why
review-cycle 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 — 133 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Cycle
Unified code review orchestrator with mode-based routing. Detects input type and dispatches to the appropriate execution phase.
Architecture Overview
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Review Cycle Orchestrator (SKILL.md) │
│ → Parse input → Detect mode → Read phase doc → Execute │
└───────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
│
┌─────────────────┼─────────────────┐
↓ ↓ ↓
┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐
│ session │ │ module │ │ fix │
│ (git changes│ │(path pattern│ │(export file │
│ review) │ │ review) │ │ auto-fix) │
└─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘
phases/ phases/ phases/
review-session.md review-module.md review-fix.md
Auto Mode Detection
// ★ 统一 auto mode 检测：-y/--yes 从 $ARGUMENTS 或 ccw 传播
const autoYes = /\b(-y|--yes)\b/.test($ARGUMENTS)
When autoYes is true, skip all interactive confirmations and use defaults throughout the review cycle phases.
Mode Detection
function detectMode(args) {
if (args.includes('--fix')) return 'fix';
if (args.match(/\*|\.ts|\.js|\.py|\.vue|\.jsx|\.tsx|src\/|lib\//)) return 'module';
if (args.match(/^WFS-/) || args.trim() === '') return 'session';
return 'session'; // default
}
| Input Pattern | Detected Mode | Phase Doc |
|---|---|---|
src/auth/** |
module |
phases/review-module.md |
src/auth/**,src/payment/** |
module |
phases/review-module.md |
WFS-payment-integration |
session |
phases/review-session.md |
| (empty) | session |
phases/review-session.md |
--fix .review/ |
fix |
phases/review-fix.md |
--fix --resume |
fix |
phases/review-fix.md |
Usage
Skill(skill="review-cycle", args="src/auth/**") # Module mode
Skill(skill="review-cycle", args="src/auth/** --dimensions=security,architecture") # Module + custom dims
Skill(skill="review-cycle", args="WFS-payment-integration") # Session mode
Skill(skill="review-cycle", args="") # Session: auto-detect
Skill(skill="review-cycle", args="--fix .workflow/active/WFS-123/.review/") # Fix mode
Skill(skill="review-cycle", args="--fix --resume") # Fix: resume
Skill(skill="review-cycle", args="-y src/auth/**") # Auto mode (skip confirmations)
# Common flags (all modes):
--dimensions=dim1,dim2,... Custom dimensions (default: all 7)
--max-iterations=N Max deep-dive iterations (default: 3)
# Fix-only flags:
--fix Enter fix pipeline
--resume Resume interrupted fix session
--batch-size=N Findings per planning batch (default: 5)
--max-iterations=N Max retry per finding (default: 3)
What ships with it
3 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 133 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 2c0b6f587c4a
review-cycle is a skill published in the GitHub repository catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow (2,124 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 1,446 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
resolve-pr-comments
This skill should be used when user asks to "address PR comments", "resolve PR feedback", "handle review comments", "fix PR issues", "respond to PR review", or explicitly invokes "resolve-pr-comments".
review-pr
This skill should be used when user asks to "review a PR", "review pull request", "review this pr", "code review this PR", "check PR.
gitlab-create-mr
Create GitLab merge requests from a local branch using a reviewable workflow for branch checks, GitLab host detection, diff analysis, title and description writing, and glab mr create. Use when opening a GitLab merge request, drafting or improving merge request copy, preparing a branch for review, or working across…
code-review
Request or perform a git-backed code review for a defined diff or SHA range using implementation context and requirements. Use when finishing a task, completing a major feature, preparing to merge, or when you need a fresh review before proceeding.
github-pr-creation
Creates GitHub Pull Requests with automated validation and task tracking. Use when user wants to create PR, open pull request, submit for review, or check if ready for PR. Analyzes commits, validates task completion, generates Conventional Commits title and description, suggests labels. NOTE - for merging existing…
pr-review-fix-pipeline
Reviews a PR and applies fixes for the non-controversial findings: review, fix, test, and commit in one pass. Writes code, so use it only on feature branches where automatic edits are fine. Trigger on: "review and fix PR", "auto-fix the PR", "review PR #X and fix issues", "run the review pipeline".