Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to j4th/mtg-mcp-server. 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/j4th/mtg-mcp-server/main/.agents/skills/superpowers/receiving-code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/j4th/mtg-mcp-serverWrote 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/j4th/mtg-mcp-server/receiving-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/j4th/mtg-mcp-server/receiving-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/j4th/mtg-mcp-server/receiving-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/j4th/mtg-mcp-server/receiving-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/j4th/mtg-mcp-server/receiving-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 | $0.00038 | $0.01459 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00584 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00292 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00146 |
Grade A, and why
receiving-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 3d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to receiving-code-review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 206 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Reception
Overview
Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
Core principle: Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.
The Response Pattern
WHEN receiving code review feedback:
1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)
3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each
Forbidden Responses
NEVER:
- "You're absolutely right!" (explicit instruction-file violation)
- "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!" (performative)
- "Let me implement that now" (before verification)
INSTEAD:
- Restate the technical requirement
- Ask clarifying questions
- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong
- Just start working (actions > words)
Handling Unclear Feedback
IF any item is unclear:
STOP - do not implement anything yet
ASK for clarification on unclear items
WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.
Example:
your human partner: "Fix 1-6"
You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later
✅ RIGHT: "I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding."
Source-Specific Handling
From your human partner
- Trusted - implement after understanding
- Still ask if scope unclear
- No performative agreement
- Skip to action or technical acknowledgment
From External Reviewers
BEFORE implementing:
1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?
2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?
3. Check: Reason for current implementation?
4. Check: Works on all platforms/versions?
5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?
IF suggestion seems wrong:
Push back with technical reasoning
IF can't easily verify:
Say so: "I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate/ask/proceed]?"
IF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:
Stop and discuss with your human partner first
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 206 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 091df1629510
receiving-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository j4th/mtg-mcp-server (20 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,459 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to receiving-code-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
clean-code
Clean Code principles applied to this TypeScript / Next.js / React project, with a strong emphasis on eliminating duplication (DRY). Use before writing new code, during refactors, after Sonar flags duplicatedlines, or when reviewing a PR that adds similar-looking code to existing modules.
code-review
Review code for quality, maintainability, and correctness.
reviewing-update-sets
Reviewing, analyzing, and comparing ServiceNow update sets before promotion, singly or in batches. Shows changes, risks, dependencies, and conflicts. Use when the user mentions update sets, customizations, promotion, code review, change tracking, pre-deployment review, sysupdatexml, customer updates, 'what changed in…
pr-alignment-loop
Iterate a PR to its final form by running two opposing reviewer droids (reviewer-robustness and reviewer-minimalist) in a bounded back-and-forth loop. The main orchestrator synthesizes their feedback, makes edits, runs tests, and stops when both approve, on stagnation, or after 3 rounds. Use when the user asks to…
typescript-craftsmanship
Professional TypeScript + React + Next.js coding standards enforcer. Use this skill whenever writing, reviewing, or refactoring TypeScript code in any project — whether it's a new feature, a bug fix, a refactoring pass, or a code review. Trigger on: any TypeScript or TSX file creation/editing, "clean up this code"…
mtg-commander-analysis
Expert Magic: The Gathering Commander (EDH) deck analysis, optimization, and building assistant. Use this skill whenever the user asks about Commander decks, EDH optimization, power level assessment, bracket placement, mana base construction, card cuts/additions, deck building, commander selection, synergy analysis…