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 itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skills --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skillsWrote 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/itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skills/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skills/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skills/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/itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skills/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skills/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00023 | $0.01313 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00656 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00263 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00131 |
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 10d 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 — 247 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
code-review
Guidelines for requesting and performing code reviews effectively.
Core Principle
Review early, review often - catch issues before they escalate.
When to Request Review
Mandatory Reviews
- After completing individual tasks in workflows
- After finishing major features
- Before merging to main branch
- After significant refactoring
Recommended Reviews
- Every 3 tasks in a longer workflow
- When unsure about implementation approach
- After adding new dependencies
- When touching security-sensitive code
How to Request Review
Get Commit Context
# Recent commits
git log --oneline -10
# Diff from main
git diff main..HEAD
# Changed files
git diff --name-only main..HEAD
# Specific commit
git show <commit-hash>
Provide Context
When requesting review, include:
- What changed and why
- Areas of concern or uncertainty
- Testing done
- Related issues/PRs
Review Checklist
Functionality
- Code does what it's supposed to do
- Edge cases are handled
- Error handling is appropriate
- No obvious bugs or logic errors
Code Quality
- Code is readable and self-documenting
- Functions/methods are focused (single responsibility)
- No unnecessary complexity
- DRY - no significant duplication
- Naming is clear and consistent
Security
- No hardcoded secrets
- Input validation present
- SQL injection prevention
- XSS prevention
- Auth/permissions checked
Performance
- No N+1 queries
- No unnecessary re-renders (React)
- Expensive operations are optimized
- Caching used where appropriate
Testing
- Tests cover new functionality
- Tests cover edge cases
- Existing tests still pass
- Test names are descriptive
Style & Conventions
- Follows project coding standards
- Consistent with surrounding code
- Linting passes
- TypeScript types are appropriate
Severity Levels
🔴 Critical (Must Fix Now)
- Security vulnerabilities
- Data loss potential
- Crashes or major bugs
- Breaking changes without migration
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 247 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A a95e6a14acfa
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository itsnex1s/awesome-claude-skills (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,313 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
cn-check
Install and run the Continue CLI (cn) to execute AI agent checks on local code changes. Use when asked to "run checks", "lint with AI", "review my changes with cn", or set up Continue CI locally.
printing-press-output-review
Internal sub-skill: agentic review of a printed CLI's sampled command output for plausibility issues that rule-based checks can't encode (substring-match relevance, format bugs, silent source drops, ranking failures). Invoked via the Skill tool by the main printing-press skill at Phase 4.85 and printing-press-polish…
review
Validate plans, execution, or PRs against wish criteria — returns SHIP / FIX-FIRST / BLOCKED with severity-tagged gaps.
review
Adversarial fresh-context review of an increment before it ships. Every finding cites path:line and is re-verified. Use when saying "review", "grill this", or "critique the implementation".
genie-orca-review
Independent, read-only review of a group, a wish, or a PR on Orca — SHIP / FIX-FIRST / BLOCKED with severity-tagged findings. Council and retro are this skill with a different input.
argot-check
Score your working changes with argot — flag code foreign to this repo's own patterns (unfamiliar dependencies, APIs, constructs), functions the repo already has, code filed in the wrong place, imports that break the repo's layering, and tests weakened, disabled, or deleted alongside a production change — before…