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 elleryfamilia/loadout --skill ce-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/elleryfamilia/loadoutWrote 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/elleryfamilia/loadout/ce-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/elleryfamilia/loadout/ce-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/elleryfamilia/loadout/ce-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/elleryfamilia/loadout/ce-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/elleryfamilia/loadout/ce-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 | $0.00044 | $0.16128 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.06451 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.03226 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.01613 |
Grade B, and why
ce-code-review scanned grade B with 1 finding 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.
Subtle steeringmediumPrompt injection
Instructions that bias recommendations or shape behaviour without the user noticing.
**Re-partition triage groups after apply.** Triage groups describe the *remaining* work. After Stage 5c, prune applied findings out of `triage_groups` before Stage 6 rendering — a group must never tell the user to handle How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 708 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Reviews code changes using dynamically selected reviewer personas. Spawns parallel sub-agents that return structured JSON, then merges and deduplicates findings into a single report.
When to Use
- Before creating a PR
- After completing a task during iterative implementation
- When feedback is needed on any code changes
- Can be invoked standalone
- Can run inside larger workflows; use
mode:agentwhen the caller needs JSON instead of markdown tables
Argument Parsing
Parse $ARGUMENTS for optional tokens. Strip each recognized token before interpreting the remainder as a PR number, GitHub URL, or branch name.
| Token | Example | Effect |
|---|---|---|
mode:agent |
mode:agent |
Report-only: return JSON instead of markdown tables and skip the Stage 5c apply (the caller applies). Does not change reviewer selection, merge logic, or scope rules (see Output format) |
mode:headless |
mode:headless |
Deprecated alias for mode:agent |
mode:report-only |
mode:report-only |
Deprecated — ignored. Former no-artifacts mode; default behavior is review-only without checkout |
base:<sha-or-ref> |
base:abc1234 or base:origin/main |
Diff base on the current checkout (explicit; skips auto base detection) |
plan:<path> |
plan:docs/plans/2026-03-25-001-feat-foo-plan.md |
Plan file for requirements verification (explicit) |
grouping:auto |
grouping:auto |
Default — build thematic triage groups when findings span distinct concerns (Stage 5 step 9b) |
grouping:off |
grouping:off |
Suppress triage groups: no Triage Groups section, empty triage_groups in JSON |
grouping:always |
grouping:always |
Always build triage groups, even for small reviews |
Grouping is presentation, not a mode. The grouping: tokens change how the finding set is organized for triage — never reviewer selection, merge logic, scope rules, or the Stage 5c apply decision.
Mode alias: mode:headless normalizes to mode:agent. mode:agent + mode:headless is not a conflict.
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 · 708 lines · 44 tokens per session scan B 1ebd8edd87d5
ce-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository elleryfamilia/loadout (32 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 16,128 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (subtle steering). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-12.
Other skills, from other repositories
michel-packmind-engineer-review
Review an implemented GitHub issue the way a senior Packmind engineer would — the human-judgment checks that ESLint, the TypeScript compiler, and e2e tests cannot catch (authorization scoping, hexagonal-architecture conformance, analytics-event wiring, UX copy, UI reactivity, CLI behavior, multi-tenancy safety, and…
review
Independently assess designs, plans, implementations, PRs, or repository quality; return evidence and SHIP, FIX-FIRST, or BLOCKED without applying fixes.
fix
Resolve blocking review gaps through bounded repairs and independent re-review; diagnose stalled attempts without expanding scope.
deslop
Clean up the prose, code or interface already in scope — protect its meaning, voice and behaviour, remove what only adds reading work, and return findings instead of edits when a review was asked for.
ralphctl-code-review-and-quality
Multi-phase code-quality skill — primary frame for the evaluator role in Execute, the architecture axis in Plan, and correctness/readability in Refine. Multi-axis code review with severity vocabulary. Use when acting as the evaluator assessing a generator's output, and when reviewing any change before signalling…
project-spine-kickoff
Use when the user wants to set up Project Spine for a new project — phrases like "new client project", "kickoff", "create AGENTS.md from scratch", "generate agent instructions for this repo", "set up project context". Runs spine init → edits brief → spine compile → reviews outputs. For stale files use…