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 agentmods add skills/jakubsuplicki/codument/code-reviewernpx skills add jakubsuplicki/codument --skill code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jakubsuplicki/codumentWrote 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/jakubsuplicki/codument/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jakubsuplicki/codument/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jakubsuplicki/codument/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00119 | $0.00731 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00060 | $0.00365 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00146 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00073 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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 4d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- code-reviewer — 88% identical, 12 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
When reviewing code, follow this structured process:
1. Read First, Judge Second
Read all changed files completely before writing any feedback. Understand the intent and context before critiquing details.
2. Categorize Findings by Severity
- Critical — Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, correctness bugs
- High — Performance issues that will bite in production, error handling gaps, race conditions
- Medium — API design issues, missing validation at system boundaries, type safety gaps
- Low — Style inconsistencies, naming, minor readability improvements
3. What to Check
Correctness
- Does the code do what it claims to do?
- Are edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values)?
- Are error paths tested and recoverable?
Security
- Input validation at system boundaries (user input, external APIs)
- SQL injection, XSS, command injection risks
- Secrets or credentials in code
- Dependency vulnerabilities
Architecture
- Does this change belong in this module?
- Are the abstractions at the right level?
- Will this be maintainable in 6 months?
- Does it follow the existing patterns in the codebase?
Performance
- O(n²) or worse in hot paths?
- Unbounded queries or collections?
- Missing indexes on queried fields?
- Unnecessary allocations in loops?
Testing
- Are the critical paths covered?
- Do tests verify behavior, not implementation?
- Are edge cases and error paths tested?
4. How to Give Feedback
- Lead with the specific file and line
- State what the issue is, not just that there is one
- Explain WHY it matters, not just that it's wrong
- Suggest a fix when possible
- Distinguish between "must fix" and "consider changing"
5. Output Format
## Code Review: [component/feature name]
**Overall Assessment**: [Good | Needs Work | Critical Issues] — one sentence summary
### Critical Issues
[numbered list or "None found"]
### High Priority
[numbered list with file:line references]
### Medium Priority
[numbered list]
### Low Priority
[numbered list]
### Architecture Positives
[what's done well — always include this]
### Recommended Priorities
[ordered list of what to fix 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 99 lines · 119 tokens per session scan A 0b6af091ff12
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository jakubsuplicki/codument (47 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 119 tokens to every session and 731 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
golden-rss
Use when testing the rss golden build.
golden-chat-single
Use when testing the goldenchatsingle golden build.
decided-import
Reformat ONE existing document (a decision, requirement, design, roadmap, or prompt) into ONE valid RAC (requirements-as-code) artifact, with a mandatory human-review step before any file is written and decided validate as the deterministic close. Use when a user wants to add or import a single existing decision or…
trellis-brainstorm
Guides collaborative requirements discovery before implementation. Creates task directory, seeds PRD, asks high-value questions one at a time, researches technical choices, and converges on MVP scope. Use when requirements are unclear, there are multiple valid approaches, or the user describes a new feature or complex…
keep-the-why
Extract and preserve the reasoning code cannot explain - decisions, rejected alternatives, workarounds, incidents, constraints - plus project setup/decline and maintainer interviews. Not for what changed (see Keep a Changelog) - only why.
pre-modification-check
Use before modifying, refactoring, moving, or deleting files in a Repowise-indexed repository, especially shared utilities, core modules, public APIs, or files the user did not explicitly identify.