code-review-checklist

code-review-checklist is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from davila7/claude-with-skills. It costs 36 tokens per session (569 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A checklist for reviewing code changes in four areas: security, correctness, speed, and readability. It checks for issues such as exposed credentials, unsafe input handling, edge cases, and inefficient database queries.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review code, inspect a pull request, or audit changes for security, logic, performance, and maintainability problems.
Why use it?
It gives code reviews a consistent set of checks, making common defects easier to spot before changes are accepted.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit Use it to review code, inspect a pull request, or audit changes for security, logic, performance, and maintainability problems.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/davila7/claude-with-skills/code-review-checklist
About the project

Claude With Skills is a progressive course that teaches developers to create reusable, portable Agent Skills for Claude Code, from basic SKILL.md files to advanced automation and plugin packaging. It is intended for developers who want repeatable instructions and workflows instead of repeatedly pasting the same guidance. The catalogue contains the course's skills, agents, and instruction.

davila7/claude-with-skills · 11 stars · on GitHub · claude-with-skills.vercel.app

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.

Any agent
npx skills add davila7/claude-with-skills --skill code-review-checklist
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/davila7/claude-with-skills

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for code-review-checklist

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/davila7/claude-with-skills/code-review-checklist/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/davila7/claude-with-skills/code-review-checklist)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/davila7/claude-with-skills/code-review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/davila7/claude-with-skills/code-review-checklist/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for code-review-checklist

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/davila7/claude-with-skills/code-review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/davila7/claude-with-skills/code-review-checklist.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 36 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 569 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
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 5.1 $0.00036 $0.00569
Opus 5 $0.00018 $0.00284
Sonnet 5 $0.00007 $0.00114
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00057

Measured 11d ago against content hash 2e9cafb1e745, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-review-checklist 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 11d 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.

src/content/docs/01-basic/lesson-03-repetitive-tasks/examples/code-review-checklist/SKILL.md · 50 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 50 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Instructions

Work through each category in the checklist below. For each item, either confirm it passes or flag the specific file and line number where the issue appears.

1. Security

  • Hardcoded secrets: check for API keys, passwords, tokens, or credentials embedded in the code
  • Input validation: confirm that inputs from external sources (user input, API responses, file contents) are validated before use
  • SQL injection: check that any database queries use parameterized statements or an ORM, never raw string concatenation with user input
  • Authentication and authorization: if the code touches access control, verify that checks happen server-side and cannot be bypassed by the caller

2. Correctness

  • Edge cases: null values, empty collections, zero, negative numbers, empty strings — does the code handle these?
  • Error paths: are errors caught at the right level? Are they handled or propagated with enough context to debug?
  • Off-by-one: check loop bounds and index arithmetic
  • Concurrency: if the code runs in a concurrent environment, check for shared mutable state without proper synchronization

3. Performance

  • N+1 queries: check for database queries inside loops
  • Unnecessary work: repeated computation of the same value, re-fetching data that was already fetched
  • Memory: large allocations inside tight loops, unbounded collections that grow with input size

4. Readability

  • Naming: variables, functions, and classes should communicate intent without needing a comment
  • Comments: comments should explain why, not what. Flag comments that describe what the code does (the code shows that already) and missing comments where the intent is non-obvious
  • Function length: flag functions that do more than one thing or that span more than roughly 40 lines without a clear reason
  • Magic numbers: unexplained numeric or string literals that should be named constants

5. Tests

  • Happy path coverage: does the test suite exercise the main success case?
  • Edge case coverage: are the edge cases identified in the Correctness section tested?
  • Test clarity: do test names describe the behavior being tested, not the implementation?
  • Mocks and stubs: are external dependencies properly isolated in unit tests?

Read the full file on GitHub · 50 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. 11d ago First seen · 50 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 2e9cafb1e745

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository davila7/claude-with-skills (11 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 569 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 2026-08-30.