rereview

rereview is a skill for Claude Code from drn/dots. It costs 29 tokens per session (4,040 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A fresh, independent final review of all changes on a branch before merging. It checks for regressions, meaning new problems caused by the changes, and missed issues.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before merging a branch to inspect its changes, tests, project setup, and differences from the main branch.
Why use it?
A second review from scratch can expose blind spots that the original implementation or review overlooked.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: $ARGUMENTS substitution. Also seen: mentions subagents.

Good fit Use it before merging a branch to inspect its changes, tests, project…

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/drn/dots/rereview
View source ↗ drn/dots
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 drn/dots --skill rereview
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/drn/dots

Made for: Claude Code.

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 rereview

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drn/dots/rereview.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/drn/dots/rereview)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/drn/dots/rereview"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drn/dots/rereview.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 29 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 4,040 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 $0.00029 $0.04040
Opus 5 $0.00015 $0.02020
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00808
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00404

Measured 3d ago against content hash ba2ec16523a5, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-06, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

rereview 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 3d 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.

agents/skills/rereview/SKILL.md · 388 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 388 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Fresh-Eyes Re-Review

Re-review all branch changes from scratch with independent competing reviewers. Designed for when you need absolute confidence before merging -- no regressions, no blind spots.

Arguments

  • $ARGUMENTS - Optional: branch or commit range to review (defaults to current branch vs main/master)

Context

  • Current branch: !git branch --show-current
  • Base ref: !git branch -r 2>/dev/null | grep -oE 'origin/(main|master)' | head -1
  • Git status: !git status --short
  • Project type: !ls go.mod Gemfile package.json Cargo.toml pyproject.toml 2>/dev/null | head -5
  • Test framework: !git ls-files 2>/dev/null | grep -E '_test\.|\.test\.|_spec\.' | head -10
  • Changes vs main: !git diff --stat origin/main...HEAD 2>/dev/null | head -50
  • Changes vs master: !git diff --stat origin/master...HEAD 2>/dev/null | head -50

Overview

You are the lead coordinator for a fresh-eyes re-review. Your job:

  1. Gather every change on the branch
  2. Run the full test suite to establish a regression baseline
  3. Launch 3 independent reviewer sub-agents in parallel -- they do NOT see each other's findings
  4. Synthesize their reports, surface disagreements, and produce a final verdict

Core principle: This is a slow, paranoid review. Speed does not matter. Thoroughness does. Every changed line must be analyzed. Every behavior change must be justified. If there is any doubt about a regression, it is flagged as BLOCKING.

You do NOT review code yourself. You coordinate and synthesize.


Phase 0: Gather Everything

  1. Determine review scope:
IF $ARGUMENTS contains a branch name or commit range:
  Use that as the review scope
ELSE:
  Review current branch changes vs the default branch (main/master)
  1. Collect the full diff and all changed files:
git diff {base}...HEAD                    # full diff
git diff {base}...HEAD --name-only        # changed file list
git log --oneline {base}...HEAD           # all commits on this branch

Read the full file on GitHub · 388 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. 3d ago First seen · 388 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A ba2ec16523a5

Subscribe to this mod's changes

rereview is a skill published in the GitHub repository drn/dots (23 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 4,040 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

review-implement-phase

Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.

prisma/orm · 38 tokens

engram-branch-pr

PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.

Gentleman-Programming/engram · 37 tokens

verify-behavior

Verify or reproduce visible product behavior by driving the real UI with pi-computer-use's checked tools, requiring verified expect postconditions and durable state evidence for meaningful UI flows. Use when triage needs visual reproduction, implementation needs behavioral proof, review needs interactive confirmation…

nicknisi/dotfiles · 68 tokens

github-contributor

End-to-end playbook for shipping high-quality pull requests to open-source projects you don't maintain — discovery, CONTRIBUTING compliance, PR-size check, minimal-diff implementation, PR description with AI-assisted disclosure, conflict resolution, and post-submission maintainer interaction. Use whenever creating…

daymade/claude-code-skills · 133 tokens

revdiff

Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…

umputun/revdiff · 248 tokens

write-pr

Reference standards for writing pull request titles and descriptions in the tldraw repository, plus the pre-flight comment sweep over the diff. Use as supporting guidance when another skill or workflow needs PR content standards, not as the user-facing create/update PR workflow.

tldraw/tldraw · 53 tokens