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 ivegamsft/basecoat --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ivegamsft/basecoatWrote 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/ivegamsft/basecoat/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ivegamsft/basecoat/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ivegamsft/basecoat/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/ivegamsft/basecoat/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ivegamsft/basecoat/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 | $0.00073 | $0.00288 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00144 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00058 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00029 |
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 5d 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.
What it actually says
Code Review
Use this skill when the task is to review code rather than write it.
Review Priorities
- Bugs and behavioral regressions
- Data loss, security, and correctness risks
- Missing validation or broken edge cases
- Missing or weak tests for changed behavior
- Secondary maintainability concerns
Output Shape
- Findings first, ordered by severity
- File references for each finding
- Open questions or assumptions
- Short summary only after findings
Non-Goals
- Do not rewrite the code just because there is a different style preference.
- Do not bury real risks under a long summary.
Related Guardrails
- Code Review Escalation — When and how to escalate findings to blocking issues vs inline comments
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 5d ago First seen · 40 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A a62fd986f1ab
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ivegamsft/basecoat (4 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 288 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
refactor
Expert code refactoring based on Martin Fowler's catalog — improve maintainability without changing behavior. Covers code smells, composing methods, moving features, organizing data, simplifying conditionals, method calls, and generalization. Triggers on: refactor, 重构, clean up, improve code, code smell, extract…
code-quality-principles
Applies KISS, YAGNI, and SOLID principles for clean code with reduced complexity. Use when refactoring or reviewing code for over-engineering.
octocode-roast
Use when code needs a blunt evidence-backed roast or memorable critique: smell inventory, debt ranking, hot-path autopsy, savage/diff review, security or performance sins, or practical redemption paths. Phrases like roast this, brutal review, top sins, cleanup debt. Polite evidence-first PR review → octocode-research.
understand
Review and understand freshly AI-generated code. Scans the current repo's uncommitted/branch changes and builds a Claude-style light-themed two-column webpage — left is the project folder tree of changed files, right is the selected file's syntax-highlighted diff (additions/deletions clearly distinguished from…
code-review-web
Review web application code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, and stack-specific anti-patterns. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review code, debug a production issue, investigate a build failure, audit security, or check a PR before merging. Triggers on code review, review my code, debug…
checkup-simplify
Use this skill when the user asks for conservative cleanup of already changed source files, similar to Claude Code /simplify, but the active agent may be Cursor, Codex, Gemini, or OpenCode.