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 agentmods add skills/diillson/chatcli/code-review-checklistnpx skills add diillson/chatcli --skill code-review-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/diillson/chatcliWhat 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 | $0.00018 | $0.00642 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00321 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00128 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00064 |
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 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.
This is a copy
89% identical to code-review-checklist — 4 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Checklist
Quick Review Checklist
Correctness
- Code does what it's supposed to do
- Edge cases handled
- Error handling in place
- No obvious bugs
Security
- Input validated and sanitized
- No SQL/NoSQL injection vulnerabilities
- No XSS or CSRF vulnerabilities
- No hardcoded secrets or sensitive credentials
- AI-Specific: Protection against Prompt Injection (if applicable)
- AI-Specific: Outputs are sanitized before being used in critical sinks
Performance
- No N+1 queries
- No unnecessary loops
- Appropriate caching
- Bundle size impact considered
Code Quality
- Clear naming
- DRY - no duplicate code
- SOLID principles followed
- Appropriate abstraction level
Testing
- Unit tests for new code
- Edge cases tested
- Tests readable and maintainable
Documentation
- Complex logic commented
- Public APIs documented
- README updated if needed
AI & LLM Review Patterns (2025)
Logic & Hallucinations
- Chain of Thought: Does the logic follow a verifiable path?
- Edge Cases: Did the AI account for empty states, timeouts, and partial failures?
- External State: Is the code making safe assumptions about file systems or networks?
Prompt Engineering Review
// ❌ Vague prompt in code
const response = await ai.generate(userInput);
// ✅ Structured & Safe prompt
const response = await ai.generate({
system: "You are a specialized parser...",
input: sanitize(userInput),
schema: ResponseSchema
});
Anti-Patterns to Flag
// ❌ Magic numbers
if (status === 3) { ... }
// ✅ Named constants
if (status === Status.ACTIVE) { ... }
// ❌ Deep nesting
if (a) { if (b) { if (c) { ... } } }
// ✅ Early returns
if (!a) return;
if (!b) return;
if (!c) return;
// do work
// ❌ Long functions (100+ lines)
// ✅ Small, focused functions
// ❌ any type
const data: any = ...
// ✅ Proper types
const data: UserData = ...
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 110 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 905ec9820ad5
code-review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository diillson/chatcli (89 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 642 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to code-review-checklist, differing in 4 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
pptx
从论文、大纲或结构化文本生成 PowerPoint (.pptx) 演示文稿。Use when 用户需要把一篇论文/文章/大纲做成幻灯片、slides、演示文稿、PPT、deck。Don't use when 只需纯文本总结、生成 Word/PDF、或修改已有 pptx 的单个像素级样式。.
ai-style
当任务是用中文撰写或改写面向读者的文案(产品发布稿、公众号文章、邮件、README 等), 或用户反馈文字「AI 味太重」「不像人写的」时,加载本 Skill。.
curly-quote-sft
Skill "curly-quote-sft" from bojieli/ai-agent-book, covering 中文技术文档符号与引用规范, 何时加载, 符号定义, 决策优先级 and 正反例约束.
triage
你是当前任务的分诊协调者。先识别用户的全部目标、顺序依赖和验收条件,再按 “事实检索 → 计算/执行 → 写作”顺序逐步请求切换到需要的专业能力。不要替专业 能力完成它的工作,也不要在信息缺失时臆造结果。.
writing
将共享历史中的已验证事实和计算结果整理成符合受众、格式与长度约束的成稿。.
research
用真实检索工具查找可追溯的事实、数据和来源。.