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 isvlasov/rageatc-oss --skill reviewing-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/isvlasov/rageatc-ossWrote 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/isvlasov/rageatc-oss/reviewing-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/isvlasov/rageatc-oss/reviewing-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/isvlasov/rageatc-oss/reviewing-code.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00044 | $0.01366 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00683 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00273 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00137 |
Grade A, and why
reviewing-code 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 7d 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 — 130 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewing Code
Structured review methodology producing consistent, severity-based, actionable feedback. This skill defines the review process — how to conduct a review, format findings, and decide; the what to look for lives in perspective reference files the orchestrator loads selectively. Non-code artefacts use assessing-quality (rageatc-core-oss); architecture design review is the critic's job at architecture approval.
Perspective Model
Perspectives are reference files under references/ defining what to examine. The orchestrator tells the reviewer-agent which to load.
| Reference | Focus | Typical use |
|---|---|---|
references/spec-compliance.md |
Does code match the brief and acceptance criteria? | All tiers — always loaded |
references/code-quality.md |
Correctness, simplicity, readability, test quality | Standard + Thorough |
references/security.md |
Input validation, injection, auth, data exposure | Thorough, or when chunk handles user input |
references/whole-project.md |
Full codebase against PRD success criteria | End of Standard/Thorough build only |
references/design-compliance.md |
UI matches system.md tokens, depth, patterns | Standard + Thorough, when project has system.md and chunk touches UI |
Tier defaults (orchestrator may override — e.g., security for a Quick auth fix):
| Tier | Perspectives loaded |
|---|---|
| Quick | spec-compliance |
| Standard | spec-compliance → code-quality → design-compliance (if system.md exists and chunk touches UI) |
| Thorough | spec-compliance → code-quality → design-compliance (if applicable) → security (as needed) |
| End-of-build | whole-project (standalone, against PRD not brief) |
Inputs Required
- Enriched roadmap chunk — acceptance criteria, file set, purpose (the enriched roadmap IS the brief)
- ARCHITECTURE.md — patterns, conventions, component boundaries
- Codebase access and changed files list
- Test results — or the ability to run the suite
- Perspective references — loaded by orchestrator
- For re-reviews: previous review and the developer's changes
What ships with it
5 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 130 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A f7b731bcdc8f
reviewing-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository isvlasov/rageatc-oss (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 1,366 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
challenge
Use before a root-cause, done/verified claim, irreversible action, or 2nd-time fix reaches the owner (APEX or plain conversation); also fires at every eLicit/Verify gate. Not for code correctness (use sniper).
code-quality
Use when validating code quality after modifications -- SOLID compliance, DRY duplication, linter errors, architecture violations. Do NOT use for functional verification (run verification FIRST, then code-quality).
elicitation
Use when an expert agent self-reviews and self-corrects code after the Execute phase, before sniper validation (BMAD-METHOD elicitation techniques).
react-effects-audit
Use when auditing React or Next.js components for unnecessary or unsafe useEffect usage -- detects 9 anti-patterns from "You Might Not Need an Effect".
pr-summary
Summarize current pull request with diff, comments, and changed files. Use when reviewing PRs or before merging.
sniper-check
Use when validating code quality after modifications. Runs sniper agent in isolated forked context for clean, fast validation.