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 kensaurus/cursor-kenji --skill audit-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kensaurus/cursor-kenjiWrote 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/kensaurus/cursor-kenji/audit-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kensaurus/cursor-kenji/audit-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kensaurus/cursor-kenji/audit-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/kensaurus/cursor-kenji/audit-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kensaurus/cursor-kenji/audit-code-review.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 | $0.00055 | $0.02078 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00831 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00416 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00208 |
Grade A, and why
audit-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 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 — 290 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Skill
Degree of freedom: MIXED — Phases 1–2 judgment [HIGH freedom];
mandatory pre-review git/docs [LOW freedom — run exactly].
Review this PR or named diff. Repo-wide anti-patterns → audit-code-quality.
Bulk transform semantics → audit-codemod-safety.
How to reason
- Observe — quote the hunk and the surrounding file (not the line alone)
- Interpret — what breaks, leaks, or duplicates if this merges?
- Classify — blocking / suggestion / nit / praise
- Severity — security, data-loss, or break-existing = blocking
Worked example
Observe: new
GET /api/invoices/:idreturnsInvoice.findById(id)with nouserIdpredicate (app/api/invoices/[id]/route.tsin this diff). Interpret: any authenticated caller reads another user's invoice. Classify: blocking (IDOR). Severity: Critical — must fix before merge. Finding:[id]/route.ts| add ownership check | blocking
Pre-review checks [LOW freedom — run exactly]
Before reviewing code:
1. Read Relevant Documentation
README.md (project conventions)
src/[domain]/@_[domain]-README.md (domain-specific patterns)
CONTRIBUTING.md (code standards)
2. Understand the Full Change
If reviewing a PR or commit:
git log --oneline -10 # recent context
git diff <base>..HEAD --stat # files changed
git diff <base>..HEAD # full diff
If reviewing a specific file, read the FULL file for context — not just the changed lines.
3. Check for Duplicate Implementations
Use Grep and SemanticSearch to verify:
- Does this code duplicate existing functionality?
- Is there an existing component/service that should have been extended?
- Does this follow established patterns in the codebase?
4. Check Production Impact (Sentry)
If the change touches error-prone code, check if related Sentry issues exist:
sentry:search_issues
{
"organizationSlug": "<ORG_SLUG>",
"query": "issues related to <component or function being changed>",
"projectSlugOrId": "<PROJECT_SLUG>",
"regionUrl": "<REGION_URL>",
"limit": 10
}
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 Changed · -6 lines · -8 tokens per session 0cd726795601
- 1mo ago Changed d834a9ab9ff1
- 1mo ago First seen · 296 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A fc603a8b4498
audit-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository kensaurus/cursor-kenji (9 stars, last pushed 26d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 2,078 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review-codex
Final-gate code review via Codex CLI (codex-5.3, xhigh). Finds bugs, security issues, and regressions before commit. No edits — findings report only.
spec-review-codex
Audit project specs for conflicts, goal drift, ambiguity, and gaps via Codex CLI (gpt-5.2, xhigh). Read-only findings report.
codex-review
Run code reviews with the Codex CLI, prioritizing bugs, regressions, security risks, and missing tests. Use when the user asks for code review, PR review, diff review, or commit-range review via codex.
code-simplifier
Use after implementing features to simplify and refine code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability.
blind-spot-pass
Run a pre-build blind spot pass before the agent builds anything. Treat the user's prompt as the map and the real project as the territory: classify gaps across known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns (with deps, edge cases, and blast radius under unknown unknowns); ask 5 to 10 high-leverage…
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review
Extremely strict maintainability review for abstraction quality, giant files, and spaghetti-condition growth. Use only when explicitly asked for a thermo-nuclear or thermonuclear code quality review, a deep code quality audit, or an especially harsh maintainability review.