review

A final code-review process that examines proposed changes, their planned scope, and their connections across the codebase before merging. Merging means adding reviewed changes into the main project history.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before merging code, especially when a change touches several connected parts of a project or follows a tracked development plan.
Why use it?
It helps find serious problems that may remain after implementation and basic checks have passed.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/datit309/supergraph/review
Any agent
npx skills add datit309/supergraph --skill review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/datit309/supergraph

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 24 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,668 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
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 $0.00024 $0.01668
Opus 5 $0.00012 $0.00834
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00334
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00167

Measured 2d ago against content hash 550e12cea07c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 2d 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.

plugins/supergraph/skills/review/SKILL.md · 142 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

/supergraph:review

Final gate before merge. Graph-enhanced review with plan awareness.

Prerequisites

  • /supergraph:fix completed (tests pass, lint clean)

Usage

/supergraph:review | plan auth-login | plan auth-login task 2

Steps

0. Announce

"🔍 /supergraph:review — starting graph-enhanced code review..."

1. Select Plan Context

0 plans → skip | 1 → use | >1 → ask | plan <slug> → match. Parse tasks, scope to task N if provided.

2. Capture Git Range

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse origin/master || git rev-parse origin/main || git rev-parse HEAD~1)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
git diff --stat "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA" && git diff --name-only "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"

Use plan checkpoint commits as range if available. No changed files → check plan for incomplete tasks.

3. Graph Analysis (tiered)

Reindex first for CBM_PROJECT (see references/codebase-memory-contract.md#Lifecycle): index_status; if stale/degraded → index_repository (skip if BASE_SHA unchanged and .supergraph-env fresh). Then codebase-memory-mcp detect_changes, trace_path, get_graph_schema.

Tiered recipes (pick by blast radius):

  • Micro (≤2 files, <20 lines, no hub/bridge): cycles + test-gaps only (0.04s)
  • Standard (≤5 files, no cross-boundary): cycles/hubs/test-gaps + optional cross-boundary
  • Full (>5 files or hub/bridge/cross-boundary): all cycles, hubs, bridges, test-gaps, complexity, cross-boundary (0.12s). Per file: query_graph(query_type="tests", target=file).

3b. Serena (optional, selective): See serena/SKILL.md:Setup. If scan not run, call initial_instructions first. Only for hub/bridge or complexity>10 files: find_referencing_symbols/find_implementations per symbol and get_diagnostics_for_file per file. Otherwise skip. Pass as "Serena findings". Skip if unavailable.

4. Dispatch Code Reviewer (tiered, parallel with tests)

Tiered (pick by blast radius):

  • Micro (≤2 files, <20 lines, no hub/bridge): skip code-reviewer agent — tests+lint + cycles+test-gaps đủ, Critical chỉ từ tests/lint/circular (LLM 30-60s saved)
  • Standard (≤5 files, no cross-boundary): Stage1 Spec Compliance only, parallel with tests
  • Full (>5 files or hub/bridge/cross-boundary): 2-stage (Spec→Quality), parallel with tests. Join before Step 6.
Agent(subagent_type="supergraph:code-reviewer", prompt="Review BASE_SHA..HEAD_SHA. Spec first, then quality (Standard: Stage1 only). BASE_SHA/HEAD_SHA, git diff --stat + git diff (first 300 lines, or --name-only + snippets for large diffs), Graph: hubs/bridges/surprise/flows/gaps, Serena findings, Plan requirements. Output: strengths, Critical/Important/Minor, verdict YES|WITH_FIXES|NO")

Read the full file on GitHub · 142 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. 2d ago First seen · 142 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 550e12cea07c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review is a skill published in the GitHub repository datit309/supergraph (21 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 1,668 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

playwright-cli

Automates browser interactions for testing and validating your own web applications using playwright-cli. Use when you need terminal-first browser control for navigation, form filling, screenshots, tracing, bound browser sessions, debugging, or generating Playwright test code. Only use against applications you own or…

testdino-hq/playwright-skill · 64 tokens

migrate

Inventory an existing spec-driven project and apply bounded migrations to jig defaults: report, adopt-layout, rename-decisions, split-slices, slice-to-spec, seed-decisions, and copy-machinery. Use when the user says migrate this project to jig, adopt jig here, this repo already has specs — set up jig, scaffold-init…

ramboz/jig · 151 tokens

adr-workflow

Scaffold, accept, index, and link Architectural Decision Records (ADRs). Use when the user says "write an ADR", "record this decision", "resolve [deferred item] with an ADR", "supersede ADR-NNNN", or otherwise wants to capture a hard-to-reverse decision in docs/decisions/. Also use when a refinement-todo entry needs…

ramboz/jig · 122 tokens

bug-fix

Drive the teeth-gated lifecycle for reported defects: diagnose root cause, prove it, and prevent regression through REPORTED → DIAGNOSING → ROOTCAUSED → FIXING → REVIEWED → DONE, with VERIFIED, ESCALATED, and RESOLVEDONMAIN paths where needed. Auto-fires on fix this bug, debug this, root-cause this, this regressed…

ramboz/jig · 208 tokens

analyze

Cross-artifact consistency report for jig specs — a non-destructive six-category audit at CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW severity, covering duplication, ambiguity, underspecification, principle violations, coverage gaps, and terminology drift. Auto-triggers when you say analyze this spec, check for inconsistencies, audit…

ramboz/jig · 160 tokens

arch-review

Team baseline for architecture, design-doc, and RFC review — produces summary, strengths, concerns, and open questions. Auto-triggers when you say review this design, review this architecture, review this proposal, review my RFC, poke holes in this proposal, is this design sound, or critique this tech spec. Defers to…

ramboz/jig · 207 tokens