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/duthaho/claudekit/code-review-loopnpx skills add duthaho/claudekit --skill code-review-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/duthaho/claudekitWhat 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 | $0.00079 | $0.02841 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.01421 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00568 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00284 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-loop 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 212 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Loop
Overview
End-to-end code review etiquette. Covers the requesting side (preparing a PR
that's reviewable) and the receiving side (acting on feedback). The skill exists
because most code review failures aren't disagreement — they're noise. Reviewers
get PRs they can't reasonably review (1500 lines, mixed concerns, no
description) and authors get feedback they don't engage with seriously
(silent dismissals, "fixed" without explanation, defensive replies). The skill
enforces structure on both ends and dispatches claudekit:code-reviewer /
claudekit:security-auditor agents on the diff. Used after verification-gate,
before merge.
When to Use
- Opening a PR for review
- Responding to review comments on a PR you authored
- Reviewing a PR another engineer authored (the skill applies symmetrically)
- Re-requesting review after addressing feedback
When NOT to Use
- Quick fixes via direct push to a branch nobody else uses (no review needed)
- A PR is already merged and you have post-merge feedback (file a follow-up issue, don't re-litigate)
- Reviewing infra/config that the project's policy explicitly auto-approves
Process
Step 1: Prepare the PR (requesting side)
Goal: A reviewable PR.
Inputs: A branch with verified changes (you've run verification-gate).
Actions:
- The PR title is one line, describing what changed. Not "Updates" or "Fix stuff." Verb-led: "Add idempotency key to charge endpoint."
- The PR description has these sections:
- What: 1-3 sentences naming the change.
- Why: the spec link, the ticket, the bug being fixed.
- How: the design choice, especially if non-obvious. Cite the plan if one exists.
- Verification: the output from
verification-gate(paste or link). - Risk + rollback: if the change has any risk, name it and the rollback procedure.
- Check the diff size. If >400 lines (excluding tests, generated files, lockfiles), consider splitting the PR. Reviewers won't read the whole thing carefully; they'll skim, miss issues, and approve.
- Tag the right reviewers. For sensitive paths (auth, payments, data), tag the security-savvy reviewer too.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 212 lines · 79 tokens per session scan A 5351f8b04c7a
code-review-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository duthaho/claudekit (97 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 79 tokens to every session and 2,841 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
writing-workflow-skills
Use when adding a new workflow skill to pi-thinkrail-workflow, changing an existing workflow skill's role, trigger, handoff, or structure, or checking a workflow skill against the workflow system's rules. Not for authoring general-purpose skills outside this package.
writing-specs
Use when a workflow step drafts or revises a spec artifact — a goal-and-requirements, an architecture, or a module SPEC — or when a workflow skill names it at such a step. The shared quality bar for specs — not a workflow, nothing to execute.
review
Multi-agent code review for Rust CLI/TUI. UX Review inactive (terminal UI — no web frontend). Code Review only. Includes Rust/clippy-specific checklist.
source-command-audit-whitepapers
Audit version freshness, FR/EN parity, and metadata quality of all whitepapers and recap cards.
self-assessment
Interactive skill assessment with personalized learning path generation.
extreme-router-refactor
Code refactoring, tech debt cleanup, and code review expertise for ExtremeRouter. Use when cleaning up code, fixing bugs, reviewing PRs, identifying tech debt, or when the user asks to "improve this code", "fix this mess", "why is this broken", "make this cleaner", or mentions code smells, duplication, or poor…