Aegis is a method pack that guides coding agents to inspect a project's baseline, make bounded changes, and verify their work with fresh evidence. It is for people using coding-agent hosts who want fewer unverified changes and less unnecessary process. The catalogue add-ons implement this method through skills, instructions, commands, a hook, and a plugin.
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 agentmods add skills/ganyuanran/aegis/requesting-code-reviewnpx skills add GanyuanRan/Aegis --skill requesting-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GanyuanRan/AegisWrote 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/ganyuanran/aegis/requesting-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ganyuanran/aegis/requesting-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ganyuanran/aegis/requesting-code-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00038 | $0.01869 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00934 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00374 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00187 |
Grade A, and why
requesting-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 5d 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 — 220 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Requesting Code Review
Dispatch a reviewer subagent using the canonical code-reviewer.md template to
catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context
for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused
on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context
for continued work.
This skill is the canonical review-request workflow for method-pack implementation work. Use it to request review only after you have enough evidence, enough context, and a clear authority boundary for what the reviewer is being asked to assess.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
Findings First: Reviews lead with concrete findings before summary. Use bugs first, risk first, tests first. Strengths and general assessment are still useful, but they must not bury correctness, evidence, architecture, or retirement problems.
Review readiness is not merge approval. A review can reduce uncertainty and
recommend readiness, but it does not replace verification-before-completion
and does not grant completion authority.
When to Request Review
Mandatory:
- After each task in subagent-driven development
- After completing major feature
- Before merge to main
Optional but valuable:
- When stuck (fresh perspective)
- Before refactoring (baseline check)
- After fixing complex bug
Required Outputs
Before you leave this workflow, you must be able to state:
- What exact scope is being reviewed
- What plan, requirement, or contract defines success
- What Product / Requirement Baseline defines accepted behavior and non-goals
- What Architecture / Runtime Boundary Baseline defines the expected architecture state
- What fresh evidence already exists
- What compatibility boundary must still hold
- What old owner / fallback / patch stays, shrinks, or retires
- What the reviewer must specifically validate
- Whether the reviewer is providing advisory review only, or also any higher-level merge recommendation
- Aegis Visibility: why findings-first ordering, evidence sufficiency, baseline alignment, compatibility, or retirement risk matters for this review request
- Semantic context scope: which relevant canonical terms, deprecated aliases, or public naming boundaries the review must preserve
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 220 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 33a8f9a07a96
requesting-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository GanyuanRan/Aegis (1,167 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,869 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
rulesync
Generates and syncs AI rule configuration files (.cursorrules, CLAUDE.md, copilot-instructions.md) across 20+ coding tools from a single source. Use when syncing AI rules, running rulesync commands, importing or generating rule files, or managing shared AI coding configurations.
autoprompt
Explicit-only useful-first orchestration. Invoke /autoprompt to turn a mission into one executable roadmap, build dependency-safe lanes, and verify the result with independent reviewers. Never infer invocation from ordinary requests. Never resume from leftover artifacts without an explicit resume instruction.
gitnexus
将 GitNexus 作为受控可选代码智能能力接入，用于 brownfield MCP 查询、影响面分析、 detectchanges、多仓分析和更深代码图谱证据。输出必须回落到 /team- 主链和 artifacts。.
loop
Full execution protocol for MODE: LOOP — the compound-engineering loop: brainstorm → plan → build → review → improve, iterating under defense-in-depth stop conditions with generator/critic separation, durable resumable state, and mandatory compounding learning capture. Loaded on demand by the architect when the loop…
restore-internals-seams-in-finally-blocks-after-each-test
When delegating a task affected by this skill, include.
loongsuite-pilot-insight
基于 LoongSuite Pilot / AI Coding Agent 日志生成事件洞察、组织洞察、数据质量、研发效能和 AI Native 使用类 SLS 报表时使用；包含 AI Coding 事件表语义，以及团队报表可选的部门维表、deptuser 组织关系、指标口径和公共 CTE，通常与 sls-dashboard-builder 一起使用。.