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 korbinjoe/TeemAI --skill code-reviewer-reactgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/korbinjoe/TeemAIWrote 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/korbinjoe/teemai/code-reviewer-react)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/korbinjoe/teemai/code-reviewer-react"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/korbinjoe/teemai/code-reviewer-react/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/korbinjoe/teemai/code-reviewer-react"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/korbinjoe/teemai/code-reviewer-react.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 | $0.00077 | $0.01846 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00738 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00369 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00185 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer-react 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 — 195 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Positioning
Focused on logic and structure review of React + TypeScript frontend code. Checks whether code is correct, robust, and maintainable.
Difference from code-audit: code-audit focuses on CSS/styling/visual aspects (spacing, colors, responsiveness);
this skill focuses on JS/TS logic (component design, types, Hooks, performance, error handling).
Execution timing: After code submission, before merge; or when user explicitly requests review
Scan scope: Specified files, or file list obtained via git diff
Review Process
Step 1: Determine Review Scope
Determine files to review by priority:
- Files or directories explicitly specified by user
- User mentions PR or branch → run
git diff --name-only <base>..HEADto get changed files - User says "look at recent changes" → run
git diff --name-only HEAD~1to get last commit changes - None of the above → ask user which files to review
Only review .ts / .tsx / .js / .jsx files. Skip test files (*.test.* / *.spec.*),
type declaration files (*.d.ts), and config files.
Step 2: Per-file Review
Read the complete file content first, understand context, then check each item. Don't just look at the diff — local changes may introduce problems in the global context. Execute the following review items for each file.
Step 3: Summary Report
Generate a structured report using the output template at the bottom.
Review Checklist
1. Component Design
Good components are highly cohesive and loosely coupled. Check whether components have single responsibility and clear interfaces.
Check items:
- Single component exceeds 300 lines → suggest splitting into sub-components
- More than 8 Props → may need consolidation into an object or component splitting
- Components defined inside other components (nested definitions) → recreated every render, causing state loss
- Prop drilling (props passed through 2+ layers) → consider Context or composition patterns
- Component handles both data fetching and UI rendering → suggest separating into container + presentational
- Unused props or imports
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 · 195 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 840cd2807580
code-reviewer-react is a skill published in the GitHub repository korbinjoe/TeemAI (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 1,846 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
ss-learn
Capture a human-approved UI design lesson as a privacy-minimized local StyleSeed candidate, review it, and prepare an opt-in share package without transmitting project code, prompts, screenshots, or brand data. Use when a person asks StyleSeed to remember, learn from, generalize, review, or prepare a reusable rule…
ring:applying-composition-patterns
React composition patterns that scale. Avoid boolean prop proliferation by using compound components, lifting state, and composing internals. Use when refactoring components with boolean prop proliferation, building flexible component libraries, or during architecture review. Skip for simple components with 1-2 props…
spotpatch
A development workflow for React that connects a selected page element to its JSX or TSX source code and gathers context for review.
generic-react-code-reviewer
Review React/TypeScript code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md workflow compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, GPU-accelerated animations, WCAG AA accessibility, bundle size limits, and surgical simplicity. Use when completing features, before commits, or…
azure-repos
Expert knowledge for Azure Repos development including troubleshooting, best practices, decision making, architecture & design patterns, limits & quotas, security, configuration, and integrations & coding patterns. Use when managing Git/TFVC repos, branch policies/PR checks, TFVC→Git migrations, large files, or…
fuxi-security
The FuXi Security menu — pick a job: scan the codebase (the whole repository or a scoped part of it), scan changes (this branch's or a pull request's diff, or one commit), or suggest patches (findings turned into targeted patch files, each verified by a panel of agents, that you apply when you choose).