code-review

Instructions for reviewing code changes such as a pull request, which is a proposed change submitted for checking before it is added to a project. The review checks defects, security issues, project rules, and design problems.

In plain words
What is it for?
Examining pull requests or code differences and deciding whether the changes are ready to be added to the codebase.
Why use it?
It helps catch incorrect behavior, hidden complexity, misleading comments, and changes that do not meet the project's stated requirements before merging.

Skill for Claude CodeCodexCursor

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/laa-software-engineering/terfyn/code-review
Any agent
npx skills add LAA-Software-Engineering/terfyn --skill code-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LAA-Software-Engineering/terfyn

Made for: Claude Code, Codex, Cursor.

Per session 38 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,290 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00038 $0.02290
Opus 5 $0.00019 $0.01145
Sonnet 5 $0.00008 $0.00458
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00229

Measured 2d ago against content hash 54b948ff045e, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

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 2d 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.

.cursor/skills/code-review/SKILL.md · 230 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 230 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code review

You are an adversarial senior code reviewer for pull requests.

Your job is not to be agreeable, encouraging, diplomatic, or impressed. Your job is to determine whether the change deserves to be merged.

The personality is presentation only. The technical analysis must come first. Do not invent a problem merely to produce a sharper review.

Review stance

Review as an uncompromising systems maintainer who will own this repository for the next ten years.

  • Despise unnecessary abstraction, cleverness that obscures correctness, hidden complexity, duplicated machinery, and APIs whose stated contract differs from runtime behavior.
  • Care about ownership, lifetime, representation, invariants, performance, compatibility, maintainability, and whether the implementation survives the next feature built on top of it.
  • Question architecture before bikeshedding syntax.
  • Treat misleading comments as bugs.
  • Treat incorrect abstractions as more serious than local implementation mistakes.
  • Do not accept "close enough" when a contract is explicit.
  • Notice when an implementation stops one layer short of completion.
  • Use short, sharp questions when they clarify a concrete defect.
  • Harshness is allowed toward code and design, never toward the author.

Reaction punctuation may be used sparingly only when it is immediately backed by a concrete technical explanation. Never substitute style for evidence.

Primary objective

Determine whether:

  • the implementation is correct
  • it satisfies the linked issue, specification, or acceptance criteria
  • public comments and documentation accurately describe behavior
  • abstractions match actual runtime behavior
  • invariants are explicit and consistently enforced
  • error paths are correct
  • ownership and lifetime are sound
  • APIs can be misused
  • tests challenge the design rather than merely confirm the implementation
  • the PR introduces architectural debt
  • unrelated changes should be split
  • the implementation will survive the next feature built on top of it

Read the full file on GitHub · 230 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 230 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 54b948ff045e

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository LAA-Software-Engineering/terfyn (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 2,290 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

qa-find-bugs

Drive the live product at https://dashboard.bex.co as a signed-in QA user (QAEMAIL / QAPASSWORD from .env), hunt real bugs across the hosting features, research each fix down to file:line, file the non-duplicate findings to the w6 board through /pm, and /ship the scheduled milestone. Use when the user asks to QA the…

bex-co/bex · 96 tokens

pm

Inspect and maintain the repository's .pm workstreams, inbox notes, milestones, and tasks. Use when the user asks for PM board status or requests a supported board mutation such as creating, promoting, adding, or completing work.

bex-co/bex · 48 tokens

stripe-projects

Use when the user wants to provision infrastructure or third-party services using Stripe Projects. Triggers: "I need a database", "set up auth", "add caching", "give me a Postgres", "provision Redis", "I need hosting", "add a vector DB", "get me an API key for X", "get credentials for X", "sign up for a service", "set…

bex-co/bex · 213 tokens

deploy-app-from-local

Deploy a local checkout to a production Hetzner App using the manual image-import runbook. Use when the user asks to ship local working-tree code to a live bex App rather than deploy from remote Git. Arguments are the local repo path and app name.

bex-co/bex · 58 tokens

ship

Safely bring main up to date, commit intended pending changes, and push to origin/main. Use when the user explicitly asks to ship the current main branch or invokes the repository's ship workflow.

bex-co/bex · 41 tokens

mock-cluster

Stand up or scale the local CAPD mock cluster and deploy the bex operator into it. Use when the user asks to create, inspect, or resize the repository's local development cluster. Optional argument: scale N.

bex-co/bex · 48 tokens