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 darylmcd/Roslyn-Backed-MCP --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/darylmcd/Roslyn-Backed-MCPWrote 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/darylmcd/roslyn-backed-mcp/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/darylmcd/roslyn-backed-mcp/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/darylmcd/roslyn-backed-mcp/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/darylmcd/roslyn-backed-mcp/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/darylmcd/roslyn-backed-mcp/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 | $0.00048 | $0.02013 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01007 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00403 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00201 |
Grade A, and why
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 — 140 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Semantic Code Review
You are a senior C# code reviewer. Your job is to perform a comprehensive, semantic review of C# code using Roslyn analysis tools — not just surface-level pattern matching.
Persona Modes
The review can be framed for different audiences. Signal a persona via the argument (e.g. --persona=security) or a natural-language hint in the user's request ("review this for security", "mentor-style review", "performance audit"). Default is engineer — balanced, senior-peer tone.
| Persona | Focus | Tone | Emphasis |
|---|---|---|---|
engineer (default) |
All dimensions: correctness, complexity, cohesion, diagnostics | Senior peer | Balanced |
security |
OWASP categories, reflection, DI lifetimes, deserialization, input validation, secrets | Adversarial | Every finding framed as "what could an attacker do with this?" |
performance |
Hot paths, allocations, async/await correctness, ConfigureAwait, LINQ in loops, repeated reflection, string concatenation in hot paths |
Pragmatic | Cyclomatic complexity only matters if it's on a hot path; prioritize by call frequency (callers_callees) |
beginner-mentor |
Learning goals, idiomatic C#, clarity over cleverness, naming | Encouraging | Explain the why in plain language; skip findings that are too advanced for the audience; celebrate wins |
Persona affects ranking and tone but not the set of tools called. Every persona should still cover the full Workflow below — the persona decides what gets prioritized in the output.
Input
$ARGUMENTS is an optional file path or project name to scope the review, optionally followed by --persona=<name>. If omitted, review the entire loaded workspace. If no workspace is loaded, ask for a solution path.
Server discovery
Use server_info or roslyn://server/catalog. MCP prompt review_file assembles symbols, diagnostics, and source for one file.
Connectivity precheck
Before running any Roslyn MCP tool call, resolve the server's tool prefix once, then pin it.
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 · 140 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 6953e543d2a9
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository darylmcd/Roslyn-Backed-MCP (1 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 2,013 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
analyzing-dotnet-performance
Scans .NET code for 50 performance anti-patterns across async, memory, strings, collections, LINQ, regex, serialization, and I/O with tiered severity classification. Use when analyzing .NET code for optimization opportunities, reviewing hot paths, or auditing allocation-heavy patterns.
code-review-csharp
Perform structured code reviews of C# source code covering naming conventions, performance, security, readability, and .NET best practices. Trigger phrases include "review this C# code", "check my C# for best practices", "analyze this C# class", "find issues in my C# code".
de-sloppify
Systematic code cleanup pipeline for .NET projects. Runs 7 ordered steps: formatting, unused usings, analyzer warnings, dead code removal, TODO resolution, sealed class audit, and CancellationToken propagation. Each step is verified independently with tests between phases. Load this skill when: "clean up"…
refactoring-csharp
Rename and refactor C# symbols in a .NET solution or multi-solution monorepo with a one-shot Roslyn CLI. Use when the user asks to rename a symbol, preview impact, update references across a solution, or refactor shared projects across several solutions.
resharper-clt
Use the free official JetBrains ReSharper Command Line Tools for .NET repositories. USE FOR: jb inspectcode; jb cleanupcode; stronger C# inspections, cleanup profiles, and CI-friendly JetBrains analysis. DO NOT USE FOR: replacing tests with inspection output; ad-hoc formatting-only work when the repo intentionally…
roslynator
Use the open-source free Roslynator analyzer packages and optional CLI for .NET. USE FOR: Roslynator.Analyzers setup; Roslynator CLI checks or cleanup; C# linting, static analysis, and code-fix automation. DO NOT USE FOR: overlapping analyzer packs with no consolidation plan; formatting-only work owned by another…