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 skills add edheltzel/Do-Skills --skill macros-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/edheltzel/Do-SkillsWrote 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/edheltzel/do-skills/macros-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/edheltzel/do-skills/macros-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/edheltzel/do-skills/macros-code-review/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/edheltzel/do-skills/macros-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/edheltzel/do-skills/macros-code-review.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 | $0.00043 | $0.02143 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00857 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00429 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00214 |
Grade A, and why
macros-code-review 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.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
What ships with it
2 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 · 147 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A f7de2b043dd2
macros-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository edheltzel/Do-Skills (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), with no licence file. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 2,143 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-13.
Other skills, from other repositories
m15-anti-pattern
Use when reviewing code for anti-patterns. Keywords: anti-pattern, common mistake, pitfall, code smell, bad practice, code review, is this an anti-pattern, better way to do this, common mistake to avoid, why is this bad, idiomatic way, beginner mistake, fighting borrow checker, clone everywhere, unwrap in production…
unsafe-checker
A review guide for unsafe Rust code and foreign-function interfaces, which let Rust call code written in languages such as C. It covers raw pointers, memory layout, `extern` functions, safety comments, and undefined behavior.
architecture-audit
Systematic architecture audit and refactoring methodology for Rust + TypeScript codebases. Use when performing refactoring, cleanup, unification, code review, dead code removal, module reorganization, or tech debt elimination. Ensures no naming confusion, semantic overloading, hidden defaults, duplicate logic, or…
writing-rust
Idiomatic Rust development. Use when writing Rust code, Cargo crates/workspaces, Rust tests, or rustfmt/clippy/cargo workflows. Emphasizes ownership, Result errors, small APIs, stdlib-first dependencies, fast cargo feedback, and behavior tests. NOT for Go, Python, TypeScript, shell scripts, or infra-only work.
architectural_review
Review Rust code for advanced architectural patterns — capability mixins, typed commands, concurrency model choice, smart pointer/interior mutability selection, error-handling architecture, and memory layout. Use when the user asks to review system architecture, suggest broad design improvements, or evaluate trait…
hexagonal_review
Review a Rust codebase for hexagonal architecture compliance — dependency direction, port shape, adapter grouping, error boundaries, feature-flag placement, and testability. Use when the user asks to review architecture, audit layering, check ports-and-adapters discipline, or evaluate whether a Rust project's…