Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to changoo89/claude-pilot. 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/changoo89/claude-pilot/main/.claude/skills/review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/changoo89/claude-pilotWrote 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/changoo89/claude-pilot/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/changoo89/claude-pilot/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/changoo89/claude-pilot/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/changoo89/claude-pilot/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/changoo89/claude-pilot/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 | $0.00013 | $0.01589 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00794 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00318 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00159 |
Grade A, and why
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 9d 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 — 182 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
SKILL: Multi-Angle Code Review
Purpose: Comprehensive plan review with gap detection, extended reviews, and GPT expert delegation Target: plan-reviewer Agent reviewing plans before execution
Quick Start
When to Use
- Review plan before execution (/01_confirm, /review)
- Detect gaps in external service integration
- Validate test plan completeness
Quick Reference
# Load plan → Detect type → Run reviews → Apply findings
/review .pilot/plan/pending/plan.md
In Scope: 8 mandatory reviews, extended reviews, gap detection, findings application
Out of Scope: Plan creation → spec-driven-workflow | Test execution → tdd | GPT delegation → @.claude/rules/delegator/orchestration.md
Execution Steps
Core Philosophy: Comprehensive (multi-angle) | Actionable (findings map to sections) | Severity-based (BLOCKING → Interactive Recovery)
Team Lead Role
Delegate Mode: Team Lead operates in coordinate-only mode (Shift+Tab)
Pattern: Spawn review-team → Monitor reviewers → Aggregate findings → Update plan
Native Context Isolation: Agent Teams provides automatic context isolation per teammate
Step 1: Load Plan
PLAN_PATH="${1:-$(find "$(pwd)/.pilot/plan/pending" "$(pwd)/.pilot/plan/in_progress" -name "*.md" -type f | head -1)}"
[ -f "$PLAN_PATH" ] || { echo "❌ No plan found"; exit 1; }
Step 2: Multi-Angle Review Team
Create review-team with specialized teammates:
Teammate 1: Test Coverage Reviewer
Spawn teammate "test-reviewer" with prompt:
"You are a tester (see @.claude/agents/tester.md).
Review test coverage for plan: $PLAN_PATH.
Evaluate: SCs verifiable? test commands? coverage ≥80%?
Discuss findings with other reviewers via Message.
Output: PASS or FAIL with detailed findings."
Teammate 2: Type Safety & Quality Reviewer
Spawn teammate "quality-reviewer" with prompt:
"You are a validator (see @.claude/agents/validator.md).
Review type safety and code quality for plan: $PLAN_PATH.
Evaluate: TypeScript types? lint config? quality (SRP/DRY/KISS)?
Discuss findings with other reviewers via Message.
Output: PASS or FAIL with detailed findings."
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 182 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 97f96dfc8dfe
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository changoo89/claude-pilot (20 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 1,589 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
verify-implementation
A workflow that runs a project’s verification skills to produce a report on coding patterns, architecture rules, and project conventions. It is intended for work after implementation, before a pull request, or during code review.
review-loop
Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…
frontend-code-review
Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., .tsx, .ts, .js). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules.
ocr
AI-powered multi-agent code review. Simulates a team of Principal Engineers reviewing code from different perspectives. Use when asked to review code, check a PR, analyze changes, or perform code review.
generic-react-code-reviewer
Review React/TypeScript code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md workflow compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, GPU-accelerated animations, WCAG AA accessibility, bundle size limits, and surgical simplicity. Use when completing features, before commits, or…
generic-fullstack-code-reviewer
Review full-stack code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, input validation, GPU-accelerated animations, and design system consistency. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing pull requests.