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 ils15/pantheon-legacy --skill code-review-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ils15/pantheon-legacyWrote 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/ils15/pantheon-legacy/code-review-checklist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ils15/pantheon-legacy/code-review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ils15/pantheon-legacy/code-review-checklist/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/ils15/pantheon-legacy/code-review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ils15/pantheon-legacy/code-review-checklist.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 | $0.00028 | $0.00901 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00451 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00180 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00090 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-checklist 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 140 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Checklist
Systematic code review combining quality gates, security audit (OWASP Top 10), and parallel checks for comprehensive validation.
Review Scope
- Review ONLY changed files (check diff, not entire file)
- Check related commits
- Link to related PRs/issues
Automated Quality Checks (Run FIRST)
Before any manual review, run automated checks:
# Python
ruff check --select F,E,W,UP,B,SIM --output-format concise <files> && ruff format --check <files>
# TypeScript/JavaScript
biome check --write --unsafe <files>
Block review if checks fail. Return NEEDS_REVISION with specific violations.
Review Checklist
Correctness
- Logic is correct and complete
- Edge cases handled
- Error handling appropriate
- Performance acceptable
Code Quality
- No duplication (DRY principle)
- Single responsibility functions
- Clear and descriptive naming
- Reasonable complexity (no god functions)
- Proper file sizes (<300 lines)
Testing
- Unit tests written
- Coverage ≥80%
- Integration tests for workflows
- Edge cases tested
- Error conditions tested
Security (OWASP Top 10)
- Input validation present
- No hardcoded secrets/credentials
- No XXE, CSRF, XSS vulnerabilities
- Authentication/authorization proper
- Sensitive data encrypted
- Rate limiting on sensitive endpoints
- Audit logging for security events
Documentation
- Public functions documented
- Comments explain WHY not WHAT
- README/guides accurate
- API documentation complete
Feedback Format
## Verdict: APPROVED | NEEDS_REVISION | FAILED
### Issues
- CRITICAL: X | HIGH: Y | MEDIUM: Z | LOW: W
### Details
- [CRITICAL] file.py:42 — SQL injection risk, use parameterized queries
- [HIGH] component.tsx:15 — Missing input validation
- [MEDIUM] test_utils.py:8 — Edge case not covered
### 🔍 Human Review Focus
1. [Item AI cannot fully validate — e.g., business logic correctness]
2. [Item 2 — e.g., UX flow matches requirements]
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 · 140 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 0e59367c65ef
code-review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository ils15/pantheon-legacy (10 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 901 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…