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/hkuds/deepcode/review-agentnpx skills add HKUDS/DeepCode --skill review-agentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HKUDS/DeepCodeWhat 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 | $0.00048 | $0.00552 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00276 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
review-agent 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 2d 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 review-agent — 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Agent
Inspect the requested target directly and return every finding that the author would likely fix. Do not modify files, create commits, push branches, post review comments, or delegate the review to another agent.
Review the change
- Read the applicable
AGENTS.mdinstructions. - Inspect the complete diff for the requested target and enough surrounding code to understand each changed path.
- Identify concrete regressions introduced by the change. Continue through the whole diff after finding the first issue.
- Check the relevant tests and call sites to confirm that each finding is real and actionable.
For a base-branch review, compare the changes that would actually merge rather than diffing
directly against the branch tip. Resolve the comparison ref to the branch's upstream when that
upstream exists and is ahead of the local branch; otherwise use the local branch. Run
git merge-base HEAD <comparison-ref>, then inspect git diff <merge-base-sha>. If the local
branch cannot be resolved, try its configured upstream explicitly before reporting that the target
is unavailable.
Flag an issue only when all of these are true:
- It affects correctness, security, performance, or maintainability in a meaningful way.
- It is discrete and actionable.
- It was introduced by the reviewed change.
- The affected scenario or call path can be demonstrated from the code.
- The author would probably fix it if they knew about it.
Do not flag speculative concerns, pre-existing problems, intentional behavior changes, or style nits that do not obscure the code.
Write the result
Present findings first, ordered by severity. Use one entry per issue in this form:
[P1] Imperative finding title — path/to/file.rs:line
Follow the title with one short paragraph explaining the affected scenario and why the behavior is wrong. Keep the cited range as small as possible and make sure it overlaps the reviewed diff.
Use these priorities:
P0: universal release blocker or critical failure.P1: urgent defect that should be fixed next.P2: ordinary defect that should be fixed.P3: low-impact issue that is still worth fixing.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 58 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 07079efd0dc7
review-agent is a skill published in the GitHub repository HKUDS/DeepCode (16,450 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 552 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-agent, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
batch-processor
Manage large document processing by splitting into batches and coordinating the full translation workflow (extraction, translation, formatting). Use when handling documents larger than 30 pages, 60 paragraphs, or 6000 words.
doc-translator
将 PDF 格式或 Web Page 格式的源文档转换成保持原排版格式的 Markdown 格式精译中文文档。.
markdown-formatter
Format and optimize Markdown content, with special support for post-translation processing. Use when fixing Markdown syntax, adjusting layout, ensuring formatting consistency, or optimizing translated documents.
pdf-reader
Extract text, images, tables, and formulas from PDF documents and convert them to Markdown format while preserving original structure. Use when processing PDF files, extracting content, or converting PDF to Markdown.
web-translator
Extract web page content and convert to Markdown format while preserving structure, images, tables, and links. Use when converting web pages to Markdown for further processing.
zh-translator
Translate Markdown content from any language to Chinese while preserving formatting, code blocks, formulas, and special elements. Use when you need accurate Chinese translation of technical documents.