Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add clafollett/lafollettlabs-claude-plugins/plugin install code-reviewerWrote 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/clafollett/lafollettlabs-claude-plugins/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/clafollett/lafollettlabs-claude-plugins/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/clafollett/lafollettlabs-claude-plugins/code-reviewer/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/clafollett/lafollettlabs-claude-plugins/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/clafollett/lafollettlabs-claude-plugins/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00128 | $0.05950 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00064 | $0.02975 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.01190 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00595 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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 10d 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 — 596 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Expert Code Review
Lean, pragmatic code reviews with scope discipline. Stack-specific PE sub-agents do the heavy lifting; the parent skill orchestrates dispatch and consolidates findings.
Phase 1: Scope Analysis
Determine review type from the user's request:
| User Request | Review Type | What to Review |
|---|---|---|
| "Review my branch" / "Review this PR" | Branch Diff | git diff main...HEAD |
| GitHub PR URL or "Review PR #N" | PR Review | git diff <target>...<source> (auto-checkouts source branch) |
| "Review staged changes" | Staged Diff | git diff --cached |
| "Review these files: X, Y, Z" | Specific Files | Read and review entire files |
| "Review the src/services folder" | Folder | Read and review all files in folder |
| "Review this code" + pasted code | Ad-hoc | Review the provided code |
Branch / Staged
git diff main...HEAD # branch diff
git diff --cached # staged changes
if current_branch == "main":
ask user which branch to review (do NOT proceed)
PR
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json number,url,headRefName,baseRefName,author
git checkout <source_branch>
git pull
git diff <target_branch>...<source_branch>
Capture: source branch, target branch, PR number, PR URL, author. Store for Phase 6.
Critical: Review files MUST be committed to the source branch, never to main.
Files / Folders / Ad-hoc
Read the files directly. No diff context — review entire content.
Review Name (used for output filename)
if branch matches "<type>/<issue-id>-<description>":
name = issue_id # e.g., "983"
elif on a branch (no issue ID):
name = slugify(branch) # e.g., "fix-code-reviewer-cleanup"
else:
ask user for a short descriptive name
PE Routing
git diff main...HEAD --stat | tail -1 # branch reviews (informational)
git diff <target>...<source> --stat | tail -1 # PR reviews (informational)
matching_pes = PEs whose Stack Map paths intersect with files in the diff
if matching_pes is empty:
approach = "generic" # primary runs generic three-pass (no PE expertise available)
elif len(matching_pes) == 1:
approach = "single_pe" # dispatch the one matching PE
else:
approach = "multi_pe" # dispatch all matching PEs in parallel
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 596 lines · 128 tokens per session scan A 1d5718e4784f
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository clafollett/lafollettlabs-claude-plugins (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 128 tokens to every session and 5,950 once invoked, about $0.0006 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
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…