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.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.01180 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00590 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00236 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00118 |
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 4d 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 — 149 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
Review changed files and materially changed hunks in this order:
- 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.
- 4d 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 (135 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,180 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
codex
Delegate coding work to the OpenAI Codex CLI for repository changes, reviews, and focused fixes.
spotpatch
A development workflow for React that connects a selected page element to its JSX or TSX source code and gathers context for review.
latent-premises
Use when reviewing a diff or module for hidden assumptions - things the code takes for granted that nothing guarantees - or when asked "what could break this later", "what does this assume", or to harden code that works today. Complements bug-hunt: bug-hunt finds defects with triggers today; this finds the ones…
retry-safety
Use when a diff carries side effects - database writes, migrations, file mutations, network calls, payments, queue messages - to check whether running it twice is safe. Also when reviewing retry logic, crash recovery, or anything a scheduler, queue, or impatient caller might re-run. Silent when the diff touches no…
Sverklo Code Intelligence
Gives you deep codebase understanding — semantic search, blast-radius analysis, PR review, and health audits.
open-code-review
Use Alibaba Open Code Review (ocr) to review git diffs, staged changes, branches, or scan a workspace, then summarize findings and optionally fix high-confidence issues.