aistudio-app: Skill for Claude Code

.claude/skills/tech-lead-code-review/SKILL.md

tech-lead-code-review is a skill for Claude Code from corespan/aistudio-app. It costs 214 tokens per session (1,419 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A strict production code review process led from the perspective of a tech lead who must decide whether code is ready to ship.

In plain words
What is it for?
Reviewing diffs, pull requests, files, and other code for correctness, security, reliability, and release readiness.
Why use it?
It helps find defects and risks that a quick review or a review of only the changed lines could miss.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: installed under .claude/.

This is corespan/aistudio-app's own configuration. It tells Claude Code how to work on aistudio-app itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything aistudio-app configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to corespan/aistudio-app. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/corespan/aistudio-app/master/.claude/skills/tech-lead-code-review/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/corespan/aistudio-app

Made for: Claude Code.

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.

agentmods badge for tech-lead-code-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/corespan/aistudio-app/tech-lead-code-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/corespan/aistudio-app/tech-lead-code-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/corespan/aistudio-app/tech-lead-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/corespan/aistudio-app/tech-lead-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for tech-lead-code-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/corespan/aistudio-app/tech-lead-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/corespan/aistudio-app/tech-lead-code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 214 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,419 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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00214 $0.01419
Opus 5.5 $0.00086 $0.00568
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00043 $0.00284
Haiku 4.5 $0.00021 $0.00142

Measured 2mo ago against content hash 91524e37c7d9, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

tech-lead-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 2mo 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.

.claude/skills/tech-lead-code-review/SKILL.md · 88 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 88 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Tech Lead Code Review

Role

Act as the Tech Lead responsible for approving this code for production. This is a gate, not a favor. The default posture is skeptical: assume nothing is acceptable until it survives scrutiny. Code reviewed under this skill is treated as if it ships to millions of users, so silence on a problem is a bug in the review itself.

Do not soften findings, hedge with "might want to consider," or skip anything because it seems minor or because "the user probably knows." A Tech Lead who lets things slide because they seem small is how production incidents happen. If the user's actual code is small or simple, that just means fewer issues will be found — it does not mean the bar drops.

Before reviewing

Read every file involved, not just the diff hunks — surrounding context (props, hooks, imports, sibling components, types) is often where the real problems live. If the code references files, types, or utilities not shown, say so explicitly rather than guessing at their contents.

If the language/stack isn't React/TypeScript, still run the full review below: keep categories 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 as-is, and for category 3 substitute the equivalent concerns for that stack (e.g. for a Python API: input validation, resource cleanup, type hints instead of hooks/JSX-specific items). Don't drop the category — every category always produces findings or an explicit "no issues found" statement, never a silent skip.

Review categories

Work through all eight categories for every review. Do not stop early because you found "enough" issues — an incomplete category is a false pass.

1. Code Quality — readability, maintainability, naming conventions, code duplication, SOLID principles, DRY/KISS violations, unnecessary abstractions, dead code, file organization.

2. Architecture — separation of concerns, component design, scalability, reusability, dependency management, folder structure.

3. React/TypeScript — hooks best practices, state management, memoization where required, rendering performance, type safety, use of any, error boundaries, correct dependency arrays, unnecessary re-renders.

Read the full file on GitHub · 88 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.

  1. 2mo ago First seen · 88 lines · 214 tokens per session scan A 91524e37c7d9

Subscribe to this mod's changes

tech-lead-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository corespan/aistudio-app (10 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 214 tokens to every session and 1,419 once invoked, about $0.0009 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 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

autoreview

Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.

openclaw/clawhub · 17 tokens

omh-code-review

This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).

rlaope/oh-my-hermes · 48 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

explore-unknowns

Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…

dzhng/skills · 162 tokens

re0-merge

Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…

LilMGenius/paperthin · 70 tokens

asplos-writing-style

Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills · 65 tokens