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 Desquared/agents-rules-skills --skill flutter-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Desquared/agents-rules-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/desquared/agents-rules-skills/flutter-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/desquared/agents-rules-skills/flutter-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/desquared/agents-rules-skills/flutter-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/desquared/agents-rules-skills/flutter-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/desquared/agents-rules-skills/flutter-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 | $0.00047 | $0.00510 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00204 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00102 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
flutter-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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Code Review Skill
7 Criteria
1. Functionality (🔴 Blocker)
- Logic errors, missing error handling, null safety violations
2. Readability (🟠 Major)
- Clear naming, proper comments, no dead code
3. Optimization (🟠 Major)
- Unnecessary rebuilds, N+1 queries, missing const
4. Architecture (🟠 Major)
- data/domain/view pattern, repository pattern, @injectable DI
5. Design System (🟠 Major)
- ColorPalette, Spacing, Project Design System Widgets (no hardcoded)
6. Linting (🔴 Blocker)
flutter analyzemust pass (zero errors)
7. Testing (Optional)
- 90%+ unit, 50%+ widget coverage (suggest, don't block)
Quick Checks
// ❌ Hardcoded color
Text('Hi', style: TextStyle(color: Colors.red))
// ✅ Use ColorPalette
Text('Hi', style: TextStyle(
color: ColorPalette.coloursBasicText.platformBrightnessColor(context),
))
// ❌ Business logic in widget
final total = items.fold(0, (s, i) => s + i.price);
// ✅ Logic in Bloc/Cubit
@injectable class MyBloc { ... }
// ❌ No error handling
Future<Data> fetch() async {
return await api.call();
}
// ✅ Try-catch
Future<Data> fetch() async {
try {
return await api.call();
} catch (e) {
throw NetworkException(e.toString());
}
}
Severity
- 🔴 Blocker: Must fix (functionality, security, linting)
- 🟠 Major: Should fix (performance, architecture, design system)
- 🟢 Minor: Nice to fix (naming, comments)
Process
flutter analyze(must pass)- Check file structure (data/domain/view)
- Verify design system usage
- Check state management (@injectable)
- Verify error handling
- Check tests (suggest improvements)
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 75 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A e101824e63f7
flutter-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Desquared/agents-rules-skills (4 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 510 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
app-store-review
Evaluates code against Apple's App Store Review Guidelines. Use this skill when reviewing iOS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS, or visionOS app code (Swift, Objective-C, React Native, or Expo) to identify potential App Store rejection issues before submission. Triggers on tasks involving app review preparation, compliance…
swift-concurrency-pro
Reviews Swift code for concurrency correctness, modern API usage, and common async/await pitfalls. Use when reading, writing, or reviewing Swift concurrency code.
swiftui-pro
Comprehensively reviews SwiftUI code for best practices on modern APIs, maintainability, and performance. Use when reading, writing, or reviewing SwiftUI projects.
axiom-audit-camera
Use this agent to scan Swift code for camera, video, and audio capture issues including deprecated APIs, missing interruption handlers, threading violations, and permission anti-patterns.
mobile-platform-offline-validate
Review a Lightning Web Component for mobile offline compatibility — the Komaci offline static analyzer that pre-primes the data graph for Salesforce Mobile App Plus and Field Service Mobile App. Produces a finding list with code-level fixes covering inline GraphQL queries in @wire configurations, modern lwc:if /…
mobiai-review-code
Use when reviewing mobile code changes — check for lifecycle issues, memory leaks, thread safety, and platform-specific pitfalls.