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 espennilsen/pi --skill dry-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/espennilsen/piWrote 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/espennilsen/pi/dry-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/espennilsen/pi/dry-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/espennilsen/pi/dry-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/espennilsen/pi/dry-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/espennilsen/pi/dry-code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00129 | $0.01605 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00052 | $0.00642 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00321 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00161 |
Grade A, and why
dry-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 185 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
DRY Code Review Skill
Perform a structured, thorough code review focused on the DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle. The review is planned and tracked via a markdown file in plans/.
Overview
The DRY principle states: "Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system." This skill systematically finds violations and recommends fixes.
Workflow
Phase 1: Setup & Discovery
- Create the tracking plan in
plans/dry-review-<project-name>.mdusing the template below - Inventory the codebase: List all source files, their languages, sizes, and roles
- Identify scope: Confirm with the user which directories/files to include or exclude (e.g., skip
node_modules,vendor, generated files, test fixtures)
Phase 2: Automated Scanning
Run the scanning script to find likely duplication:
bash /path/to/dry-code-review/scripts/find_duplicates.sh <target_directory> [extensions]
The script detects:
- Identical or near-identical code blocks (3+ lines repeated)
- Repeated string literals and magic numbers
- Similar function signatures across files
- Repeated boilerplate and configuration patterns
Import/dependency lines are intentionally excluded from the duplicate-lines scan so they don't dominate the output.
Phase 3: Manual Analysis
After automated scanning, perform deeper analysis by reading the codebase. Look for these DRY violation categories:
Category 1: Literal Duplication
- Copy-pasted code blocks (exact or near-exact)
- Repeated string literals / magic numbers
- Duplicate configuration values
Category 2: Structural Duplication
- Functions/methods that do the same thing with minor variations
- Repeated conditional logic (same if/else chains)
- Similar class structures that could share a base class or mixin
- Repeated error handling patterns
Category 3: Logical Duplication
- Same business logic expressed differently in multiple places
- Repeated validation rules
- Duplicate data transformation pipelines
- Same algorithm implemented in multiple places
What ships with it
1 file 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 · 185 lines · 129 tokens per session scan A a8131d4aec54
dry-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository espennilsen/pi (122 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 129 tokens to every session and 1,605 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…