Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to ingo-eichhorst/Irrlicht. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ingo-eichhorst/Irrlicht/main/.claude/skills/ir:code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ingo-eichhorst/IrrlichtWrote 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/ingo-eichhorst/irrlicht/ir-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ingo-eichhorst/irrlicht/ir-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingo-eichhorst/irrlicht/ir-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/ingo-eichhorst/irrlicht/ir-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingo-eichhorst/irrlicht/ir-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 | $0.00152 | $0.02350 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00061 | $0.00940 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00470 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00235 |
Grade A, and why
ir: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 — 171 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review the Working Diff
/ir:code-review [effort] [base]
| Argument | Values | Default |
|---|---|---|
effort |
low · medium · high · xhigh · max |
medium |
base |
any git diff spec | origin/main...HEAD |
Both are positional and both optional: /ir:code-review, /ir:code-review high,
and /ir:code-review low origin/main...HEAD are all valid. A bare effort word is
an effort, never a PR number — this skill reviews a local diff and never
takes a PR argument.
Why this skill exists
The built-in /code-review is marked disable-model-invocation: the Skill
tool refuses it and it cannot be reached from Bash either. It is a
human-triggered path. That left ir:exec's review gate unrunnable (#1205),
so this is the repo's own reviewer — same job, agent-invocable, and aware of
conventions in AGENTS.md that a general-purpose reviewer wouldn't check.
It is not a replacement for the real thing. For a large or risky diff,
a human running /code-review <tier> origin/main...HEAD — or /code-review ultra for the cloud multi-agent pass — is still the stronger review, and
recommending that is a legitimate outcome of this skill.
1 · Resolve the diff
git fetch origin main # refresh the base before diffing
git diff --stat <base> # scope
git diff <base> # the review surface
This skill already defaults to origin/main...HEAD. Keep it — inside a
worktree, both of the defaults you'd otherwise reach for by hand mislead:
the local main ref is stale (never updated
when other PRs merge, so main...HEAD drags in already-merged hunks), and once
the branch has been pushed with git push -u, @{upstream}...HEAD is ~empty
(upstream now points at the pushed branch, so it reviews nothing).
origin/main...HEAD after a fetch is the honest surface.
Review only what the diff changed, plus whatever the change puts at risk. An unrelated pre-existing wart is not a finding.
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 · +8 lines 920365ba0b56
- 1mo ago Changed · -3 tokens per session 9366bb0dc45d
- 1mo ago First seen · 163 lines · 155 tokens per session scan A c7f73a023b8c
ir:code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ingo-eichhorst/Irrlicht (101 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 152 tokens to every session and 2,350 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
merge-batch
Prepare and merge an owner-selected PR batch with contributor credit and exact-candidate admission. Use for a pasted PR list; combined focused validation is diagnostic, and every actual landing still requires its applicable checks and authorization.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
engram-branch-pr
PR creation workflow for Engram following the issue-first enforcement system. Trigger: When creating a pull request, opening a PR, or preparing changes for review.
github-contributor
A step-by-step guide for contributing code, tests, documentation, or build changes to open-source projects you do not maintain. It explains how to prepare a pull request that follows the project’s rules and is easier for maintainers to review.
revdiff
Review diffs, files, and documents with inline annotations in a TUI overlay, or answer questions about revdiff usage, configuration, themes, and keybindings. Opens revdiff in agterm/tmux/zellij/herdr/kitty/wezterm/cmux/ghostty/iterm2/emacs-vterm, captures annotations, and addresses them. Works in git, hg, and jj repos…