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 christopherlouet/claude-base --skill qa-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/christopherlouet/claude-baseWrote 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/christopherlouet/claude-base/qa-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/christopherlouet/claude-base/qa-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/christopherlouet/claude-base/qa-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00029 | $0.01330 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00665 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00266 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00133 |
Grade A, and why
qa-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 4d 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 — 160 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Objective
Identify quality, security, and maintainability issues BEFORE merge.
Native features first
Claude Code ships a native /code-review that owns the review execution: effort levels from low to max, --fix to apply findings, --comment to post inline PR comments, and ultra for a multi-agent cloud review. Prefer it to run the review.
This skill's delta is the conventions the review is held to — the checklist below (incl. the substance-check.sh gate native review does not run), the naming tables, and the severity taxonomy. Use them to brief or grade a native /code-review run, or as the manual protocol where the native command is unavailable.
Instructions
1. Overview
# View the changes
git diff main...HEAD --stat
git log main...HEAD --oneline
2. Review checklist
Code quality
- Readability (clear names, short functions)
- DRY (no duplication)
- SOLID (single responsibility)
- Reasonable complexity
- No over-engineering (YAGNI: no speculative options/abstraction; could a stdlib/native/one-liner replace custom code?)
Typing (TypeScript)
- No
any - Explicit types on public APIs
- Well-defined interfaces
Tests
- Tests present and relevant
- Edge cases covered
- Mocks limited to I/O
- Substance: no hollow tests / stubs — run
./scripts/substance-check.sh <changed-files>(flags no-assertion / always-true / skipped / empty / stub; a green suite over hollow tests is not "done")
Security
- Inputs validated
- No hardcoded secrets
- No injection possible
Performance
- No N+1 queries
- No possible infinite loops
- Memory managed correctly
3. Comment format
[TYPE] file:line - comment
Types:
- [CRITICAL] - Blocking, must be fixed
- [IMPORTANT] - Should be fixed
- [SUGGESTION] - Optional improvement
- [QUESTION] - Clarification needed
- [NITPICK] - Minor detail
Expected output
## Review: [PR Title]
### Summary
- **Files modified**: X
- **Lines added**: +Y
- **Lines removed**: -Z
- **Verdict**: Approve / Request Changes / Comment
### Positive points
- [Point 1]
- [Point 2]
### Issues identified
#### Critical
- [CRITICAL] `file.ts:42` - Description
#### Important
- [IMPORTANT] `file.ts:87` - Description
### Suggestions
- [SUGGESTION] `file.ts:123` - Description
### Final checklist
- [ ] Code readable and maintainable
- [ ] Sufficient tests
- [ ] No security issue
- [ ] Acceptable performance
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 160 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A cebc3e5edaa6
qa-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository christopherlouet/claude-base (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,330 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
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.
generic-static-code-reviewer
Review static site code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md compliance. Enforces pure HTML/CSS/JS standards, minimal page weight, mobile-first design. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing changes.
generic-code-reviewer
Review code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md workflow compliance. Supports any tech stack - HTML/CSS/JS, React, TypeScript, Node.js, Python, NestJS, Next.js, and more. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing pull requests.
architecture
Use when the user asks to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, surface deepening opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable. Surfaces shallow modules and hypothetical seams using a precise vocabulary (Module / Interface / Implementation /…
persona-panel
Use this skill when you need multi-persona parallel content review — domain experts, buyer personas, compliance reviewers, or custom catalog entries reviewing a target file or output. Dispatches N persona agents in parallel, consolidates verdicts via a configurable mode (voting-quorum, hard-gate-threshold, or…