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 Crearize/ai-dev-helm --skill requesting-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Crearize/ai-dev-helmWrote 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/crearize/ai-dev-helm/requesting-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/crearize/ai-dev-helm/requesting-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/crearize/ai-dev-helm/requesting-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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/crearize/ai-dev-helm/requesting-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/crearize/ai-dev-helm/requesting-code-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 | $0.00019 | $0.00230 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00092 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00046 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00023 |
Grade A, and why
requesting-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 1mo 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to requesting-code-review — 91 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Requesting Code Review
Use the project's quality-check as the independent final review, with its prescribed roles and review budget. Do not require a reviewer after every implementation task or add a whole-branch reviewer after quality-check has already covered the same change.
Give reviewers the actual changed files, requirements, independently established test expectations, and observed verification evidence. Use the current working-tree diff for uncommitted work, not only a stale commit range. Ask reviewers to check the specification and actual behavior independently rather than simply endorse the author's explanation.
code-reviewer.md is an optional review brief. Project policy determines review scope, blocking criteria, and budget. A separate targeted investigation needs a concrete unresolved concern and must not reset the budget.
Evaluate findings against evidence. Fix confirmed blocking defects, record reasoned disagreement, and rerun checks affected by fixes. Preserve original detection sources when merging duplicate findings; represent no findings as an empty collection. Do not treat a reviewer approval as a substitute for execution evidence.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · -81 lines · -3 tokens per session 3f33440ebecf
- 1mo ago First seen · 96 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A d71cc01ba56d
requesting-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Crearize/ai-dev-helm (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 230 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to requesting-code-review, differing in 91 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
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…
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…
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…