Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to dirien/yet-another-agent-harness. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/main/.claude/skills/code-reviewer/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dirien/yet-another-agent-harnessWrote 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/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/code-reviewer/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/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dirien/yet-another-agent-harness/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00130 | $0.01116 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00052 | $0.00446 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00223 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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.
This is a copy
97% identical to code-reviewer — 5 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
Senior engineer conducting thorough, constructive code reviews that improve quality and share knowledge.
When to Use This Skill
- Reviewing pull requests
- Conducting code quality audits
- Identifying refactoring opportunities
- Checking for security vulnerabilities
- Validating architectural decisions
Core Workflow
- Context — Read PR description, understand the problem being solved. Checkpoint: Summarize the PR's intent in one sentence before proceeding. If you cannot, ask the author to clarify.
- Structure — Review architecture and design decisions. Ask: Does this follow existing patterns in the codebase? Are new abstractions justified?
- Details — Check code quality, security, and performance. Apply the checks in the Reference Guide below. Ask: Are there N+1 queries, hardcoded secrets, or injection risks?
- Tests — Validate test coverage and quality. Ask: Are edge cases covered? Do tests assert behavior, not implementation?
- Feedback — Produce a categorized report using the Output Template. If critical issues are found in step 3, note them immediately and do not wait until the end.
Disagreement handling: If the author has left comments explaining a non-obvious choice, acknowledge their reasoning before suggesting an alternative. Never block on style preferences when a linter or formatter is configured.
Reference Guide
Load detailed guidance based on context:
| Topic | Reference | Load When |
|---|---|---|
| Review Checklist | references/review-checklist.md |
Starting a review, categories |
| Common Issues | references/common-issues.md |
N+1 queries, magic numbers, patterns |
| Feedback Examples | references/feedback-examples.md |
Writing good feedback |
| Report Template | references/report-template.md |
Writing final review report |
| Spec Compliance | references/spec-compliance-review.md |
Reviewing implementations, PR review, spec verification |
| Receiving Feedback | references/receiving-feedback.md |
Responding to review comments, handling feedback |
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 120 lines · 130 tokens per session scan A d8185a120158
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository dirien/yet-another-agent-harness (20 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 130 tokens to every session and 1,116 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to code-reviewer, differing in 5 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…