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 heymegabyte/claude-skills --skill receiving-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/heymegabyte/claude-skillsWrote 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/heymegabyte/claude-skills/receiving-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/heymegabyte/claude-skills/receiving-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/heymegabyte/claude-skills/receiving-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/heymegabyte/claude-skills/receiving-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/heymegabyte/claude-skills/receiving-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 | $0.00038 | $0.00865 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00432 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00173 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00086 |
Grade A, and why
receiving-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 9d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 77 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 57b7d57cdaaf
receiving-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository heymegabyte/claude-skills (21 stars, last pushed 14d ago), with no licence file. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 865 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
agentic-code-review
Use when reviewing a diff, pull request, branch, or AI-generated code for correctness, security, regression, test, performance, and maintainability risks before merge.
repo-health-check
Use when auditing a repo before changes to find the smallest safe PR, quality risks, stale docs, missing tests, ignored-file gaps, or agent setup issues. Best first skill for unfamiliar codebases.
intelligence-review-skills
Audit the intelligence layer for duplication, drift, size, hardcoded paths and framing.
safe-change
Trace, implement, test, and independently review one bounded software change. Use for ordinary feature, bug-fix, or refactor work after the repository is bootstrapped; do not use for broad repository cleanup, production operations, or undefined rewrites.
sf-security
Audit Apex code for CRUD/FLS violations, sharing rule compliance, SOQL injection risks, and PII exposure. Scans entire codebases for security issues that cause AppExchange review failures. Use when asked about security review, AppExchange review readiness, CRUD/FLS audit, vulnerability scanning, or code security.…
pr-review
Use when conducting manual PR reviews - provides structured checklist covering security, performance, maintainability, and code quality dimensions with anti-sycophancy principles.