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 cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cenconq25/claude-code-app-studioWrote 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/cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio/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/cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio/code-review.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 | $0.00046 | $0.01958 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00783 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00392 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00196 |
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 — 242 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Read-only quality pass over a recent change. Confirms the diff respects the project's coding rules, the governing ADR, and mobile-specific health checks (cold start, frame budget, memory, battery, deep-link surface).
Phase 1: Load Targets
Read the target file(s) in full. If a directory is given, glob it for source
files (*.ts, *.tsx, *.js, *.dart, *.swift, *.kt, *.kts,
*.java, *.m, *.mm).
Read CLAUDE.md and .claude/docs/coding-standards.md to refresh the active
project rules. Read .claude/docs/technical-preferences.md to capture frame
budget, cold-start budget, memory ceiling, and forbidden patterns.
Phase 2: Identify Framework Specialists
Open the ## Framework Specialists section of technical-preferences.md.
Note:
- Primary specialist (architecture and lifecycle calls).
- Language/UI specialist (RN screens, SwiftUI views, Compose composables, Flutter widgets).
- Native modules / platform channels specialist (bridges, JNI, Obj-C++).
- State management specialist (Redux, Riverpod, MVI, Combine, etc.).
If the section is [TO BE CONFIGURED], skip the framework-specialist phase.
Phase 3: ADR Compliance
Search the changed files (and any matching story file) for ADR references:
patterns like ADR-NNN, docs/architecture/ADR-, or
Governing ADR:. If none are found, log: "No ADR references found — ADR
compliance check skipped."
For each referenced ADR, read it and pull out the Decision and Consequences sections. Classify each deviation:
- BLOCKING — the code uses a pattern explicitly rejected by the ADR.
- DRIFT — the code diverges from the chosen approach without using a forbidden pattern.
- MINOR — small textual difference that does not change architecture.
Phase 4: Standards Compliance
For each target file, score these checks:
- All public APIs (exports, public methods, public protocols) carry doc comments.
- No method exceeds 40 lines (excluding data declarations).
- Cyclomatic complexity stays under 10 per method.
- Dependencies are injected; no module-scope singletons holding mutable app state.
- Tunable values come from config/remote config, not magic numbers.
- Modules expose interfaces (TS interface, Swift protocol, Kotlin interface, abstract Dart class) rather than concrete implementations.
- No hardcoded user-facing strings — all strings flow through the localization system.
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 · 242 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A bdd01195e359
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio (42 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 1,958 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 2026-09-03.
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.