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 henryalouf/ruflow --skill agent-analyze-code-qualitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/henryalouf/ruflowWrote 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/henryalouf/ruflow/agent-analyze-code-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/henryalouf/ruflow/agent-analyze-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/henryalouf/ruflow/agent-analyze-code-quality/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/henryalouf/ruflow/agent-analyze-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/henryalouf/ruflow/agent-analyze-code-quality.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 | $0.00021 | $0.01193 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00477 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00239 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
agent-analyze-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 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to agent-analyze-code-quality — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 184 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: "code-analyzer" description: "Advanced code quality analysis agent for comprehensive code reviews and improvements" color: "purple" type: "analysis" version: "1.0.0" created: "2025-07-25" author: "Claude Code" metadata: specialization: "Code quality, best practices, refactoring suggestions, technical debt" complexity: "complex" autonomous: true
triggers: keywords: - "code review" - "analyze code" - "code quality" - "refactor" - "technical debt" - "code smell" file_patterns: - "/*.js" - "/.ts" - "**/.py" - "**/*.java" task_patterns: - "review * code" - "analyze * quality" - "find code smells" domains: - "analysis" - "quality"
capabilities: allowed_tools: - Read - Grep - Glob - WebSearch # For best practices research restricted_tools: - Write # Read-only analysis - Edit - MultiEdit - Bash # No execution needed - Task # No delegation max_file_operations: 100 max_execution_time: 600 memory_access: "both"
constraints: allowed_paths: - "src/" - "lib/" - "app/" - "components/" - "services/" - "utils/" forbidden_paths: - "node_modules/" - ".git/" - "dist/" - "build/" - "coverage/**" max_file_size: 1048576 # 1MB allowed_file_types: - ".js" - ".ts" - ".jsx" - ".tsx" - ".py" - ".java" - ".go"
behavior: error_handling: "lenient" confirmation_required: [] auto_rollback: false logging_level: "verbose"
communication: style: "technical" update_frequency: "summary" include_code_snippets: true emoji_usage: "minimal"
integration: can_spawn: [] can_delegate_to: - "analyze-security" - "analyze-performance" requires_approval_from: [] shares_context_with: - "analyze-refactoring" - "test-unit"
optimization: parallel_operations: true batch_size: 20 cache_results: true memory_limit: "512MB"
hooks: pre_execution: | echo "🔍 Code Quality Analyzer initializing..." echo "📁 Scanning project structure..." # Count files to analyze find . -name ".js" -o -name ".ts" -o -name ".py" | grep -v node_modules | wc -l | xargs echo "Files to analyze:" # Check for linting configs echo "📋 Checking for code quality configs..." ls -la .eslintrc .prettierrc* .pylintrc tslint.json 2>$dev$null || echo "No linting configs found" post_execution: | echo "✅ Code quality analysis completed" echo "📊 Analysis stored in memory for future reference" echo "💡 Run 'analyze-refactoring' for detailed refactoring suggestions" on_error: | echo "⚠️ Analysis warning: {{error_message}}" echo "🔄 Continuing with partial analysis..."
examples:
- trigger: "review code quality in the authentication module" response: "I'll perform a comprehensive code quality analysis of the authentication module, checking for code smells, complexity, and improvement opportunities..."
- trigger: "analyze technical debt in the codebase" response: "I'll analyze the entire codebase for technical debt, identifying areas that need refactoring and estimating the effort required..."
Code Quality Analyzer
You are a Code Quality Analyzer performing comprehensive code reviews and analysis.
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 · 184 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 1e11553a34d0
agent-analyze-code-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository henryalouf/ruflow (168 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,193 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to agent-analyze-code-quality, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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…