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 el-feo/ai-context --skill review-ruby-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/el-feo/ai-contextWrote 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/el-feo/ai-context/review-ruby-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/el-feo/ai-context/review-ruby-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/el-feo/ai-context/review-ruby-code/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/el-feo/ai-context/review-ruby-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/el-feo/ai-context/review-ruby-code.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 | $0.00128 | $0.01518 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00051 | $0.00607 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00304 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
review-ruby-code scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ruby Code Review
Review Ruby/Rails code changes against Sandi Metz rules, SOLID principles, Rails best practices, and security standards. Generate a structured REVIEW.md with clickable VSCode links.
Workflow
1. Detect scope
# Auto-detect base branch
git remote show origin | grep 'HEAD branch' | cut -d' ' -f5
# Get changed Ruby files (added/changed/modified/renamed only)
git diff --name-only --diff-filter=ACMR base-branch...HEAD | grep '\.rb$'
If not on a feature branch, review files specified by the user.
2. Run analysis tools
# RubyCritic on changed files
rubycritic --format json --no-browser $(git diff --name-only base...HEAD | grep '\.rb$')
# SimpleCov coverage run
COVERAGE=true bundle exec rspec
Parse rubycritic JSON for complexity/smells/duplication. Read coverage/.resultset.json for per-file coverage and uncovered lines. If tools aren't configured, invoke their respective skills for setup guidance.
Optionally run the bundled static analyzer:
ruby scripts/code_reviewer.rb <file.rb>
3. Analyze each changed file
Review in this order for each file:
OOP Design — Apply Sandi Metz rules and SOLID principles:
- Classes ≤ 100 lines, methods ≤ 5 lines, parameters ≤ 4, instance variables ≤ 4
- Controllers instantiate ≤ 1 object, views reference ≤ 1 instance variable
- SRP, Open/Closed, Liskov, Interface Segregation, Dependency Inversion
- Law of Demeter ("only talk to immediate friends")
- Tell, Don't Ask (objects make their own decisions)
- See references/sandi-metz-rules.md and references/solid-principles.md
Code Smells — Check for the 18 canonical smells:
- Structural: Long Method, Large Class, Long Parameter List, Data Clump
- Coupling: Feature Envy, Message Chains, Inappropriate Intimacy
- Conditional: Complex conditionals, case statements (polymorphism candidates), speculative generality
- Naming: Vague names (Manager, Handler, Processor), methods with "and", flag parameters
- See references/sandi-metz-rules.md (Code Smells section)
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 · 178 lines · 128 tokens per session scan A 4dc4e420939f
review-ruby-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository el-feo/ai-context (12 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 128 tokens to every session and 1,518 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
simplify
Simplifies and refines Ruby on Rails code following 37signals patterns and the One Person Framework philosophy, while preserving exact functionality. Focuses on recently modified code unless instructed otherwise. Use this skill when simplifying or refactoring Rails code, reviewing recently written Rails code for…
sgcop-setup
A setup guide for adding the sgcop Ruby and Rails code-checking rules to a project. RuboCop is a tool that finds style and quality problems in Ruby code.
gem-docs-review
Harvests offline documentation (README, CHANGELOG, public API) for every gem in a Ruby/Rails project's Gemfile.lock into a local cache, tracks gem versions in a manifest, and refreshes only gems whose version changed. Then reviews a git diff or pull request against that cache to surface (a) gem-upgrade impact …
gemtracker
Analyze Ruby gem dependencies, vulnerabilities, outdated packages, maintenance health, and insecure gem sources with the gemtracker CLI. Use when asked to audit Ruby gems, check Gemfile.lock security, review dependency health, or run gemtracker.
code-review
Use when reviewing a Rails PR, diff, or merge request. Ground findings in a real file:line. Trigger words: review PR, code review, review my diff, CR.
apply-code-conventions
Use when applying daily Rails conventions by path (DRY, YAGNI, PORO, CoC, KISS). Style defers to the project linter. Trigger words: conventions, clean code, RuboCop, DRY, YAGNI.