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 DauQuangThanh/hanoi-rainbow --skill backend-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DauQuangThanh/hanoi-rainbowWrote 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/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/backend-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/backend-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/backend-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/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/backend-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dauquangthanh/hanoi-rainbow/backend-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 | $0.00136 | $0.02740 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00068 | $0.01370 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00548 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00274 |
Grade A, and why
backend-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 9d 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 — 417 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Backend Code Review
Conduct systematic backend code reviews to identify security vulnerabilities, performance bottlenecks, code quality issues, and architectural concerns. Produces actionable reports with specific locations and fix recommendations.
Review Process
Follow this structured approach for comprehensive backend code analysis:
1. Assess Technology Stack and Scope
Identify technologies and critical areas before starting:
Technology Inventory:
Backend Language: Node.js/Python/Java/Go/C#
Framework: Express/FastAPI/Spring Boot/Gin/ASP.NET
Database: PostgreSQL/MySQL/MongoDB/Redis
Architecture: Monolith/Microservices/Serverless
Deployment: AWS/GCP/Azure/Docker/Kubernetes
Critical Review Areas (prioritize these):
- Authentication and authorization logic
- Payment processing and financial transactions
- Data access layers (ORM queries, raw SQL)
- External API integrations and webhooks
- Background jobs and async processing
- File upload and download handlers
Example Scope Definition:
Review: User authentication service
Files: src/auth/*.ts (15 files, ~2000 lines)
Priority: High (handles user credentials and sessions)
Focus: Security vulnerabilities, JWT implementation, session management
2. Review Code Quality and Structure
Evaluate code organization, design patterns, and maintainability:
Code Organization Checklist:
☐ Proper layering (controllers → services → repositories → database)
☐ Consistent file and folder naming (kebab-case, camelCase, etc.)
☐ One class/function per file (or logically grouped)
☐ No circular dependencies between modules
☐ Clear separation of business logic and infrastructure code
SOLID Principles Validation:
Single Responsibility: Each class/module has one reason to change
// ❌ Bad: UserService does too much
class UserService {
createUser() { }
sendEmail() { } // Should be EmailService
processPayment() { } // Should be PaymentService
}
// ✅ Good: Separated responsibilities
class UserService {
createUser() { }
}
class EmailService {
sendEmail() { }
}
class PaymentService {
processPayment() { }
}
What ships with it
6 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 417 lines · 136 tokens per session scan A 24c1107fe8a5
backend-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository DauQuangThanh/hanoi-rainbow (16 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 136 tokens to every session and 2,740 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
plan-authoring
Reference material for writing implementation plans (technical context, architecture decisions, data models, API contracts, project-instructions alignment). Loaded on demand by plan-feature; not directly invokable.
implementation-standards
Reference material with coding standards (defensive coding, error handling, testing patterns). Loaded on demand by the Developer sub-agent (.github/agents/developer.md); not directly invokable.
meta-reviewing-api-reviewing
Backend code review patterns. Use when reviewing API routes, database operations, auth middleware, and server utilities. Covers injection, boundary validation, authorization coverage, secret/PII exposure, error leakage, and query patterns.
code-review-hardening
Use this skill for rigorous, structured code review with a self-repair loop. Applies change-type-aware strategies (feat, fix, hotfix, refactor, migrate, docs). Findings are severity-classified, then auto-fixed where possible. Triggers on PR reviews, code review requests, or when reviewing any change set.
quality-grading
Use this skill to grade code, specifications, or design documents across four quality dimensions using a 1-5 scoring scale. In grade-and-fix mode, the skill auto-improves artifacts scoring below 5 without prompting. Invoke when you want consistent quality assessment on design, implementation, or specification with…
agent-work-auditor
Unified auditing skill for AI agent workflows. Provides change-type-aware, artifact-adaptive auditing with self-fix capabilities. Works standalone or with spec-driven extensions. Three-layer architecture: core (always active), modules (per-type), extensions (auto-detected).