review

review is a skill for Claude Code from infraspecdev/tesseract. It costs 33 tokens per session (2,598 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A code-review workflow that checks proposed changes for security, cost, system design, and acceptance criteria before merging.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it after implementation or before a merge to review code changes and document issues, decisions, and applied fixes.
Why use it?
It helps catch risky or incomplete changes before they reach the shared codebase and records findings for later reference.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: $CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT variable. Also seen: mentions subagents.

Runs only inside its plugin — its command needs a path that Claude Code sets for a plugin’s own hooks and for nothing else. Install the plugin, not this.

Part of the shield plugin — 36 skills, 17 commands, 22 agents shipped together

Good fit Use it after implementation or before a merge to review code changes and document issues, decisions, and applied fixes.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install

Getting it into your agent

This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.

Claude Code
/plugin marketplace add infraspecdev/tesseract
Claude Code
/plugin install shield

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install shield, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 36 skills, 17 commands, 22 agents.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/infraspecdev/tesseract/review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/infraspecdev/tesseract/review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/infraspecdev/tesseract/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/infraspecdev/tesseract/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/infraspecdev/tesseract/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/infraspecdev/tesseract/review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 33 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,598 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00033 $0.02598
Opus 5.5 $0.00013 $0.01039
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00007 $0.00520
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00260

Measured 1mo ago against content hash aa271b2de9cb, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

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.

shield/skills/general/review/SKILL.md · 240 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 240 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Review Orchestrator

Output Path — MANDATORY

All review output goes into a per-run, date-keyed folder under the feature's reviews/code/ directory:

{output_dir}/{feature}/reviews/code/{date}{_counter}/   ← {review_dir}
├── summary.md                       ← {review_summary}  (consolidated findings, main output)
├── changes.md                       ← applied-fixes log (side-artifact, written after step 9)
└── detailed/
    └── <agent>.md                   ← {review_detailed} (one per dispatched agent)

{output_dir}/{feature}/outputs/reviews/code/{date}{_counter}/  ← {review_outputs_dir}
├── summary.html                     ← {review_summary_html}
└── detailed/
    └── <agent>.html                 ← {review_detailed_html} (one per agent)

Where {output_dir} comes from .shield.json output_dir field (default docs/shield), {feature} is the feature folder name ({feature-name}-YYYYMMDD), {date} is today's ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD), and {_counter} is empty for the first run of the day or _2, _3, ... on same-day collisions. Numbered-run subfolders (code-review/{N}-{slug}/) are gone. Reviews never overwrite prior runs.

Resolving the counter: before writing, list {output_dir}/{feature}/reviews/code/ for entries matching today's date. If {date}/ does not exist, use _counter="". Otherwise, find the highest {date}_<N>/ and use _counter="_<N+1>". Do NOT use any other path or directory structure. The Write tool creates directories automatically.

When to Use

  • After implementing a feature or story step
  • When explicitly invoked via /review
  • As the final review at the end of an implementation pipeline

When NOT to Use

  • For plan review — use plan-review skill instead
  • For a single specific reviewer — use /review-security, /review-cost, etc.

Step Skeleton

At startup, call execute-steps to register these steps. Execute them in order, updating status after each.

Step Action Condition Mandatory
1 Load prior context (plan, research) skip if none exists No
2 Code correctness review always Yes
3 Domain-specific review skip if no active domains No
4 Dispatch agent reviewers explicit/final review only No
5 AC verification skip if no plan.json No
6 Merge + present findings always Yes
7 Apply selected fixes always Yes
8 Write summary + update manifest always Yes

Read the full file on GitHub · 240 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 240 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A aa271b2de9cb

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review is a skill published in the GitHub repository infraspecdev/tesseract (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 2,598 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

autoreview

Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.

openclaw/clawhub · 17 tokens

omh-code-review

This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).

rlaope/oh-my-hermes · 48 tokens

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"…

umputun/revdiff · 84 tokens

asplos-writing-style

Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills · 65 tokens

explore-unknowns

Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…

dzhng/skills · 162 tokens

re0-merge

Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…

LilMGenius/paperthin · 70 tokens