reviewing-code-quality

reviewing-code-quality is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from FlyFission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering. It costs 73 tokens per session (1,857 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A code-review guide for spotting unnecessary complexity, oversized files, and feature logic placed in shared code. It ends with one clear verdict about the change.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a diff or module for code-quality problems before accepting a change. It is intended for substantial or potentially complex edits, not obvious one-line fixes.
Why use it?
It helps prevent small design compromises from making a codebase harder to understand and maintain. It focuses on removing needless structure instead of merely rearranging it.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Part of the nuclear-grade plugin — 24 skills, 28 commands, 5 agents shipped together

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/flyfission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering/reviewing-code-quality
Any agent
npx skills add FlyFission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering --skill reviewing-code-quality
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/FlyFission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install nuclear-grade, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 24 skills, 28 commands, 5 agents.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for reviewing-code-quality

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/flyfission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering/reviewing-code-quality.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/flyfission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering/reviewing-code-quality)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/flyfission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering/reviewing-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/flyfission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering/reviewing-code-quality.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 73 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,857 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00073 $0.01857
Opus 5 $0.00036 $0.00928
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.00371
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00186

Measured 4d ago against content hash 94bd67becdaf, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

reviewing-code-quality 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 4d 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.

skills/reviewing-code-quality/SKILL.md · 119 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Reviewing Code Quality

Overview

Standards drift in code is the slow buildup of complexity. Files grow until no one can hold them in their head. Layers get added that do not pull their weight. Logic for one feature leaks into shared code. Clever, hard-to-follow code replaces plain, direct code. Each step looks fine on its own. Added up, they make a system no one can maintain. This review holds the line and keeps standards rising. Its strongest move is deletion: prefer removing structure over moving it around. It ends in one honest verdict, not a softened summary. A review that always says "looks good" is not a control. The cost is not only human: a controlled minimal-pair study found a coding agent on cleaner code used roughly 7-8% fewer tokens and revisited already-edited files about a third less often, at an unchanged pass rate -- so drift is also a standing tax on every future agent run. That study's authors are affiliated with a code-quality vendor whose product the finding favors, it covered one agent over six repository pairs, and it improved cost rather than correctness; treat it as an argument about price, not about capability (fuller boundary in docs/02-operating-system/token-burn-control.md).

Decision contract

  • Claim checked: the diff was read against its goal, deletion was considered before rearranging for each complexity finding, and the verdict matches the findings -- an INCONCLUSIVE verdict naming the missing evidence.
  • Artifact observed: the diff or module, its mission anchor or goal, and the shared-versus-feature layering map -> a ranked findings list (each with location, standard at risk, concrete fix) and one verdict with a reason.
  • Decision affected: block -- one verdict on the diff or module: VERIFIED, NOT VERIFIED, or INCONCLUSIVE.
  • Failure class: standards-drift (oversized files, thin pass-through layers, feature logic in shared code, or clever indirection accepted as fine).
  • Next action: return NOT VERIFIED for the owner to decide, or INCONCLUSIVE naming the missing context; standards drift that recurs escalates to a control.

Read the full file on GitHub · 119 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 4d ago First seen · 119 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A 94bd67becdaf

Subscribe to this mod's changes

reviewing-code-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository FlyFission/nuclear-grade-context-engineering (33 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 1,857 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

contextlock

Safely inspect a repository through the ContextLock MCP server. Use when exploring, searching, reviewing, or auditing repository files with ContextLock, especially before reading unfamiliar code or when sensitive files and secrets may be present.

LutaElbert/contextlock · 46 tokens

html-ppt-zhangzara-coral

OpenDesign's community-growth campaign across GitHub, Discord, and X: the loops, the content calendar, and the pipeline math. Built as a decision-grade marketing & GTM deck for growth team, community lead.

nexu-io/open-design · 55 tokens

hr-onboarding

A new-hire onboarding plan as a single page — first week schedule, buddy + manager intro, learning track, equipment checklist, and "you're set when…" outcomes. Use when the brief mentions "onboarding", "new hire", "first week plan", or "入职".

nexu-io/open-design · 62 tokens

html-ppt-hermes-cyber-terminal

OpenDesign + BYOK: choosing and wiring your own model, hands-on — cost, quality, and the routing decision. Built as a decision-grade AI literacy deck for engineers, IT, applied-AI teams.

nexu-io/open-design · 53 tokens

html-ppt-taste-brutalist

16:9 HTML deck in tactical-telemetry / CRT-terminal taste. Deactivated-CRT charcoal slides, white-phosphor monospace, hazard-red accent, scanline overlay, ASCII syntax, density over decoration. Distilled from Leonxlnx/taste-skill brutalist-skill (Tactical Telemetry mode).

nexu-io/open-design · 78 tokens

git-ai-search

Search and restore AI conversation context from git history.

git-ai-project/git-ai · 13 tokens