agentmods.dev

review-with-agents

review-with-agents is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from DGouron/review-flow. It costs 18 tokens per session (1,176 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A multi-agent code-review workflow in which separate reviewers examine different aspects of a change before producing a combined report. It requires every deducted score to be tied to a specific, cited defect.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for detailed reviews of code changes, including scoring, identifying blocking issues, and explaining fixes with file and line references. It is intended for reviews where several focused passes are useful.
Why use it?
It helps cover code quality, architecture, testing, and other review concerns while keeping the assessment evidence-based. It also prevents reviewers from inventing weaknesses just to avoid giving a high score.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: mentions CLAUDE.md.

not rated 44repo 3d ago A scan SkillSpector: warn 18 tokens original MIT

Good fit Use it for detailed reviews of code changes, including scoring, identifying blocking issues, and explaining fixes with file and line references. It is intended for reviews where several focused passes are useful.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/dgouron/review-flow/review-with-agents
View source ↗ DGouron/review-flow dgouron.github.io
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 DGouron/review-flow --skill review-with-agents
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DGouron/review-flow

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 review-with-agents

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

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dgouron/review-flow/review-with-agents"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dgouron/review-flow/review-with-agents.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 18 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,176 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. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

  • high Prompt Injection · line 8
    Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.
    Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
How audits are shown
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 $0.00018 $0.01176
Opus 5.5 $0.00007 $0.00470
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00004 $0.00235
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00118

Measured 2mo ago against content hash 581839bf644a, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-with-agents 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 2mo 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.

templates/en/review-with-agents/SKILL.md · 238 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 238 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Advanced Code Review

You are: An expert code reviewer with deep knowledge of software architecture.

Your approach:

  • Multi-agent sequential analysis (prevents memory issues)
  • Each agent focuses on one aspect
  • Scores and verdicts per agent
  • Comprehensive final report

Scoring discipline (anti-sandbagging)

A score is a claim, not a vibe. Deducting without a cited defect is as dishonest as praising without substance.

  • Max is the default. A clean diff scores the maximum — never round down to look rigorous.
  • Every point deducted is sourced: file:line + the real problem + the fix. No citable defect -> the score IS the maximum.
  • Never invent a flaw to dodge a perfect score. A justified design choice or a deliberate trade-off is not a defect.
  • Pre-existing debt the diff only touches mechanically (rename, import rewrite) is reported as context, never scored against the diff.
  • Naming: any naming criticism must carry a concrete better name (current -> suggested + why). If you cannot propose a clearer name, the name is fine — say so. "Could be clearer" with no alternative is not a finding.

Customization Points

This template uses these agents:

  1. Architecture - Code structure and dependencies
  2. Testing - Test coverage and quality
  3. Code Quality - Style, naming, best practices

⚡ Sequential Architecture (Anti Memory-Leak)

CRITICAL: Agents are executed ONE BY ONE to prevent memory spikes.

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    SEQUENTIAL ORCHESTRATOR                       │
│                                                                 │
│  [1] Architecture  →  [2] Testing  →  [3] Code Quality  → ...  │
│                                                                 │
│  Each agent:                                                    │
│  1. Emits [PROGRESS:agent:started]                              │
│  2. Analyzes code                                               │
│  3. Emits [PROGRESS:agent:completed]                            │
│  4. WAITS before starting the next                              │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Read the full file on GitHub · 238 lines

Files

What ships with it

1 file 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.

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. 2mo ago First seen · 238 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 581839bf644a

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-with-agents is a skill published in the GitHub repository DGouron/review-flow (44 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,176 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.

Building agentsCode reviewaiautomationclaudeclean-architecturedashboard
Related

review-with-agents compared with skills from other repositories

review-with-agents next to 6 skills from other repositories
ModTypeStarsLast pushLicenceScanTokensWorks with
review-with-agentsDGouron/review-flowSkill443d agoMITA18Claude Code, Codex
brooks-harnesshyhmrright/brooks-lintSkill1.6kyesterdayMITA271Claude Code
releasehyhmrright/brooks-lintSkill1.6kyesterdayMITA135Claude Code, Codex
new-skillhyhmrright/brooks-lintSkill1.6kyesterdayMITA145Claude Code, Codex
brooks-audithyhmrright/brooks-lintSkill1.6kyesterdayMITA143Claude Code
brooks-sweephyhmrright/brooks-lintSkill1.6kyesterdayMITA178Claude Code
brooks-debthyhmrright/brooks-lintSkill1.6kyesterdayMITA131Claude Code