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 jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kit --skill code-review-and-qualitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kitWrote 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/jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kit/code-review-and-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kit/code-review-and-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kit/code-review-and-quality/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/jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kit/code-review-and-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kit/code-review-and-quality.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00051 | $0.00794 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00318 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00159 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-and-quality 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 1mo 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review And Quality
Purpose
Route every code review through one canonical policy and only the profiles that match the changed surface and declared architecture. This file is an entrypoint, not a second source of review rules.
Required Loading Sequence
- Read
references/review-policy.mdcompletely. - Always activate the
corepolicy. - Activate the generic backend and/or frontend profile from the changed surface.
- Activate a strict architecture profile only from an explicit declaration in the task, applicable repository instructions, an ADR, a specification, or architecture documentation.
- Treat file names and folders only as corroborating evidence; layout alone does not activate a strict profile.
- Report
profile_resolution: selected profiles, omitted profiles, evidence for selection, and fallback used when architecture is not declared. - Apply the findings and final-output contracts from the canonical policy.
Profile Routing
Generic backend
Read
references/profiles/backend.md for server,
worker, consumer, persistence, backend API, or server-side integration changes.
Declared Clean/DDD/hexagonal/CQRS backend
Read
references/profiles/backend-clean-ddd-cqrs.md
only for the parts of Clean Architecture, DDD, hexagonal architecture, or CQRS
that the repository or task explicitly declares.
Generic frontend
Read
references/profiles/frontend.md for web,
mobile, desktop, UI, client state, navigation, local storage, or client network
changes.
Declared Clean/layered frontend
Read
references/profiles/frontend-clean-layered.md
only when a layered/Clean client architecture is explicitly declared.
Contextual Adaptation
When no strict profile is declared:
- preserve correctness, dependency direction, boundary clarity, testability, replaceability, and explicit contracts;
- translate those principles into the project's actual modules, services, stores, hooks, components, controllers, adapters, or other boundaries;
- follow applicable local instructions, ADRs, and canonical examples;
- do not require DDD building blocks, Clean layers, CQRS, repositories, value objects, use-case classes, or specific folder/naming conventions;
- do not treat personal preference as architecture evidence.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 108 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 3963ac8ff7f6
code-review-and-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository jcarlosrodicio/opencode-agent-orchestration-kit (141 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 794 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
ahk-review
Preview a code review against ticket/objective alignment, with deep semantic (name-vs-behavior) analysis. No tasks created, no harness tracking.
layout-grid
Grid and alignment rules for a macOS SwiftUI app, with three checks that catch misalignment (a lint for off-grid numbers, a layout probe that measures real frames in snapshot mode, and a grid overlay). Use when building or reviewing a custom page, card, row, form, or sheet, after every build that touched layout, or…
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
plannotator
Reference for using Plannotator (its plannotator tool when you have one, otherwise the CLI): plan review, code review, annotating files, URLs, folders, and running local apps, annotating the last assistant message, browsing archived plan decisions, exporting or sharing Guided Reviews, and the Plannotator Inbox…
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
agtx-review
Self-review completed work. Check for correctness, edge cases, and code quality. Write review to .agtx/review.md and stop.