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 kkollsga/codingest --skill codingest-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kkollsga/codingestWrote 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/kkollsga/codingest/codingest-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kkollsga/codingest/codingest-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kkollsga/codingest/codingest-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/kkollsga/codingest/codingest-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kkollsga/codingest/codingest-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 | $0.00066 | $0.01855 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00742 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00371 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00186 |
Grade A, and why
codingest-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 7d 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 — 167 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codingest code review
Use Codingest for structural evidence during review. The graph complements the git diff, source reading, and literal-text search; it does not replace them.
Review workflow
Prerequisites: the
codingestCLI must be on PATH.pip install codingestalso provides the builder-awarecodingest-mcpserver and a compatible graph engine. Rust-only environments can alternatively use Cargo. Examples that invoke the externalkgliteCLI require a compatiblekglite>=0.20.0,<0.21; verifykglite --versionbefore using its agent-response features.
Inspect the diff and repository guidance first. Identify changed symbols and the base/head revisions, then build or refresh the graph without executing repository code:
codingest build . --output .kglite/code-review.kgl --format json
For a committed comparison, use one graph spanning both revisions:
codingest build . --revs '<base>' '<head>' \
--output .kglite/code-review.kgl --format json
Before reusing an artifact, check freshness:
codingest status --output .kglite/code-review.kgl --format json
Work from the question
Use this loop only as far as the question requires. It has no required map set or fixed query count.
- Establish target and coverage. Record the exact repository, revision, symbol, path, or subsystem in scope. For a completeness or absence claim, identify the relevant groups before retrieving their rows and record every query, executor, or presentation boundary.
- Retrieve a relevant relation. Ask the smallest structural question that can change the answer: callers, callees, implementers, imports, dependencies, routes, tests, or revision identity.
- Inspect selected source. Open the implicated definitions and call sites at exact lines. Graph edges identify candidates; source and executed tests establish behavior.
- Retain an evidence map. Keep each working claim with its graph revision, exact query or reference, concrete example or input state, what an assertion actually guarantees, and any unresolved question. These fields can be a compact note rather than separate documents.
- Resolve consequential uncertainty. Expand only when a contradiction, missing precondition, or correctness risk could change the answer. Stop when the requested conclusions have direct support.
What ships with it
3 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.
- 7d ago Changed 1822e648c480
- 9d ago Changed 297be8406c15
- 12d ago Changed 5ce4035292c6
- 14d ago Changed 021103eb7df4
- 16d ago Changed 3d61a875b101
- 25d ago Changed 696c27d73e10
- 1mo ago Changed 93cf8dd8cdd5
- 1mo ago Changed a4658ce63543
- 1mo ago Changed c1d2910dd0d8
- 1mo ago First seen · 167 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A 46123b924976
codingest-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository kkollsga/codingest (0 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 1,855 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…