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 cxuu/golang-skills --skill go-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cxuu/golang-skillsWrote 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/cxuu/golang-skills/go-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cxuu/golang-skills/go-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cxuu/golang-skills/go-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/cxuu/golang-skills/go-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cxuu/golang-skills/go-code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk pass
- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00056 | $0.02853 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.01426 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00571 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00285 |
Grade A, and why
go-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 12d 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 — 182 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Go Code Review Checklist
Compatibility:
references/WEB-SERVER.mduseslog/slogexamples that require Go 1.21+.
Resource Routing
assets/review-template.md- Use when formatting review output with Must Fix, Should Fix, and Nits sections.scripts/pre-review.sh- Run before manual review to collect gofmt, go vet, and golangci-lint results.references/WEB-SERVER.md- Read when reviewing an HTTP server that combines concurrency, context, logging, error handling, and shutdown behavior.
Review Procedure
Use
assets/review-template.mdwhen formatting the output of a code review to ensure consistent structure with Must Fix / Should Fix / Nits severity grouping.
- Run
gofmt -d .andgo vet ./...to catch mechanical issues first - Read the diff file-by-file; for each file, check the categories below in order
- Flag issues with specific line references and the rule name
- After reviewing all files, re-read flagged items to verify they're genuine issues
- Summarize findings grouped by severity (must-fix, should-fix, nit)
Validation: After completing the review, re-read the diff once more to verify every flagged issue is real. Remove any finding you cannot justify with a specific line reference.
Formatting
- gofmt: Code is formatted with
gofmtorgoimports→ go-linting
Documentation
- Comment sentences: Comments are full sentences starting with the name being described, ending with a period → go-documentation
- Doc comments: All exported names have doc comments; non-trivial unexported declarations too → go-documentation
- Package comments: Package comment appears adjacent to package clause with no blank line → go-documentation
- Named result parameters: Only used when they clarify meaning (e.g., multiple same-type returns), not just to enable naked returns → go-documentation
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 182 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 8db6e39ad057
go-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository cxuu/golang-skills (159 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 2,853 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
design-review
Deep design review of Go codebase — naming, structure, consistency, interfaces, error handling. Scores each dimension and provides actionable fixes.
agents-md
Generate AGENTS.md files for Go, Rust, TypeScript, and Java projects. Use this skill whenever the user asks to create, scaffold, bootstrap, update, or review an AGENTS.md (or agent-instructions, CLAUDE.md, repo guide for agents) file in a codebase. Also trigger when the user says "add AGENTS.md", "make this repo…
crawlkit
Maintain and release the crawlkit Go library, preserving downstream compatibility for gitcrawl, slacrawl, discrawl, and notcrawl.
go-code-reviewer
Review Go code with a defect-first approach using repository policy (constitution.md first, then AGENTS.md fallback). Use for code review, PR review, quality checks, risk analysis, and regression detection.
go-review-lead
Orchestrate a comprehensive Go code review by triaging code changes, dispatching vertical review skills (security, concurrency, error, logic, performance, quality, test, observability) as parallel agents, then consolidating results into a unified report. Use for full Go PR review or comprehensive code review. Replaces…
go-expert
Expert-level Go development with Go 1.22+ features, concurrency, standard library, and production-grade best practices. Use when the user mentions concurrency, microservices, or backend, or when the task involves idiomatic Go, goroutines and channels, context-based cancellation, or writing an HTTP server.