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 holon-run/holon --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/holon-run/holonWrote 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/holon-run/holon/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/holon-run/holon/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/holon-run/holon/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/holon-run/holon/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/holon-run/holon/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00023 | $0.01345 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00538 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00269 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00135 |
Grade A, and why
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 161 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Skill
Summary
Use this skill to review a code change independently of the hosting platform. The result is a concise, evidence-backed assessment for a human or another workflow to consume. This skill does not know how to fetch a pull request or publish comments.
When To Use
- Reviewing a patch, commit range, change set, or proposed implementation
- Checking regressions before a merge, release, or deployment
- Producing findings for a platform-specific review adapter
Do Not Use
- Implementing the fix while reviewing
- Approving, blocking, or otherwise replacing a human merge decision
- Treating an unavailable file, test, or instruction as evidence that no issue exists
Inputs
Use the context supplied by the caller. It may include:
change_set: changed files, hunks, and the before/after revisionsbaseline: relevant surrounding code, configuration, interfaces, and historyproject_instructions: repository or path-specific review rulesprior_feedback: earlier findings and their current statusverification_budget: commands or checks that may be run
Do not assume a particular directory or file name. If a caller supplies a manifest, resolve inputs from its artifact entries and record missing or unavailable entries in the coverage summary.
Workflow
1. Establish scope and coverage
- Identify the exact change set and its baseline.
- Read applicable project instructions before judging behavior.
- List the files and hunks actually reviewed.
- Separate facts observed in the supplied context from assumptions.
- If core context is missing, continue only with an explicit limited-scope result; never infer a clean review from missing evidence.
2. Generate candidates
Perform an explicit hunk-level risk scan. For every changed file and materially changed hunk, consider each applicable category before moving on:
- Correctness and data integrity
- Security, authorization, trust boundaries, and secret handling
- Lifecycle, failure handling, retries, cancellation, and cleanup
- Concurrency, ordering, idempotency, and duplicate side effects
- Compatibility, migrations, and public contract changes
- Resource usage and performance
- Tests, observability, and maintainability when they affect behavior
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 Changed · +12 lines 2a8080ce7e5f
- 1mo ago First seen · 149 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A a1cae30b8749
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository holon-run/holon (175 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,345 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
codex
Delegate coding work to the OpenAI Codex CLI for repository changes, reviews, and focused fixes.
gh-issues
Fetch GitHub issues, spawn sub-agents to implement fixes and open PRs, then monitor and address PR review comments. Usage: /gh-issues [owner/repo] [--label bug] [--limit 5] [--milestone v1.0] [--assignee @me] [--fork user/repo] [--watch] [--interval 5] [--reviews-only] [--cron] [--dry-run] [--model glm-5]…
github
GitHub operations via gh CLI: issues, PRs, CI runs, code review, API queries. Use when: (1) checking PR status or CI, (2) creating/commenting on issues, (3) listing/filtering PRs or issues, (4) viewing run logs. NOT for: complex web UI interactions requiring manual browser flows (use browser tooling when available)…
pr-review-agent
Deploy or update the PR Review Agent on Omnara, an agent that reviews GitHub pull requests through Omnara's GitHub integration and leaves inline findings. Use when the user asks to deploy, set up, update, or remove the PR review agent.
review-pr
Review a pull request (GitHub) or merge request (GitLab) and provide detailed feedback.
security-audit
Answer security questions about code, review a file or change for vulnerabilities, or run a full multi-agent audit of a codebase with a coverage ledger and independently verified findings.