A checklist and set of templates for reviewing code changes. It covers correctness, code quality, security risks, error handling, and tests.

Use it to review changes, check for common security problems such as injection or exposed secrets, assess error handling, and give structured feedback.

It helps reviewers check more than whether code appears to work, including edge cases, unsafe input handling, missing tests, and accidental complexity.

Code Review — Skill for Claude Code by ChrisMckerracher

Install

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.

Any agent

npx skills add ChrisMckerracher/claude-dream-team --skill code-review

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ChrisMckerracher/claude-dream-team

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install dream-team, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 11 skills, 3 hooks.

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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 36 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 779 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.

Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.

Token cost

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	$0.00036	$0.00779
Opus 5	$0.00018	$0.00390
Sonnet 5	$0.00007	$0.00156
Haiku 4.5	$0.00004	$0.00078

Measured 9d ago against content hash 081c65b3bb1b, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-09, from the pricing page.

Security

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 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.

dream-team-plugin/skills/code-review/SKILL.md · 103 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 103 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Review Skill

Review Checklist

Correctness

Code does what the task description requires
Edge cases are handled (null, empty, boundary values)
Error handling is appropriate (not swallowed, not over-caught)
Async operations handle failures and cancellation
State mutations are intentional and controlled

Code Quality

Follows project naming conventions
Functions are focused (single responsibility)
No dead code, commented-out blocks, or TODO hacks
DRY violations are intentional, not accidental
Complexity is justified (no over-engineering)
Imports are clean (no unused, no circular)

Security (OWASP Quick Check)

No SQL/NoSQL injection vectors
No XSS vectors (user input rendered as HTML)
No command injection (user input in shell commands)
No hardcoded secrets, tokens, or credentials
Input validation at system boundaries
Authentication/authorization checks present where needed
Sensitive data not logged or exposed in errors

Testing

Tests exist for new/changed functionality
Tests assert meaningful behavior (not just "doesn't crash")
Test names describe what is being tested
No test pollution (tests are independent)
Both happy path and error cases covered

Performance

No N+1 query patterns
No unbounded loops or recursion
No blocking I/O in async contexts
Reasonable memory usage (no large unnecessary copies)
Pagination/limits for list operations

Feedback Template

## Code Review: [Task ID] - [Title]

### Summary
[1-2 sentence overall assessment]

### Must Fix
Issues that block approval:

1. **[file:line]** - [Issue description]
   Suggestion: [How to fix]

### Should Fix
Issues that should be addressed:

1. **[file:line]** - [Issue description]
   Suggestion: [How to fix]

### Nits
Optional improvements:

1. **[file:line]** - [Suggestion]

### Positive Notes
[What was done well - always include at least one]

### Verdict
[ ] Approved
[ ] Approved with nits
[ ] Changes requested (see Must Fix)
[ ] Needs discussion (see below)

Read the full file on GitHub · 103 lines

Changes

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 · 103 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 081c65b3bb1b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

Code Review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ChrisMckerracher/claude-dream-team (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 779 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.

Code review

autoreview

Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.

openclaw/clawhub · 20 tokens

rework-rate

Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.

bradygaster/squad · 20 tokens

omh-code-review

This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.

rlaope/oh-my-hermes · 46 tokens

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"…

umputun/revdiff · 84 tokens

code-reviewer

Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.

RightNow-AI/openfang · 17 tokens

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…

LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills · 115 tokens