Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to LEEI1337/phantom-neural-cortex. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/LEEI1337/phantom-neural-cortex/master/.claude/skills/code-quality-check/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LEEI1337/phantom-neural-cortexWrote 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/leei1337/phantom-neural-cortex/code-quality-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/leei1337/phantom-neural-cortex/code-quality-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/leei1337/phantom-neural-cortex/code-quality-check/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/leei1337/phantom-neural-cortex/code-quality-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/leei1337/phantom-neural-cortex/code-quality-check.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 | $0.00010 | $0.00467 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00187 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00093 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00047 |
Grade A, and why
code-quality-check 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.
What it actually says
Code Quality Check
Run this checklist before committing code:
1. SOLID Principles
[S] Single Responsibility - Each class/function does ONE thing
[O] Open/Closed - Extend without modifying
[L] Liskov Substitution - Subtypes are substitutable
[I] Interface Segregation - Small, focused interfaces
[D] Dependency Inversion - Depend on abstractions
2. Clean Code Rules
✓ Names reveal intent
✓ Functions < 20 lines
✓ Max 3 parameters (use objects if more)
✓ No magic numbers/strings
✓ DRY - No duplication
✓ Comments explain WHY not WHAT
3. Error Handling
✓ All errors caught and handled
✓ No silent failures
✓ Meaningful error messages
✓ Proper logging
✓ Cleanup in finally blocks
4. Performance
✓ No N+1 queries
✓ Proper indexing
✓ Caching where appropriate
✓ Lazy loading for heavy ops
✓ No memory leaks
5. Security
✓ Input validated
✓ Output sanitized
✓ No SQL injection vectors
✓ No XSS vulnerabilities
✓ Secrets in env vars
✓ Dependencies updated
6. Testing
✓ Unit tests written
✓ Edge cases covered
✓ Mocks used for external deps
✓ Tests are fast (< 1s each)
✓ Coverage > 80%
7. Documentation
✓ Public APIs documented
✓ Complex logic explained
✓ README updated
✓ Examples provided
Quick Scan (30 seconds)
# Run before commit:
1. grep -r "TODO\|FIXME\|XXX\|HACK" .
2. Check for console.log / print statements
3. Verify no commented-out code blocks
4. Check for hardcoded credentials
5. Run linter
6. Run tests
Token-Efficient Usage
- Use as final validation, not during writing
- Catch issues before review (saves back-and-forth)
- Automate what you can (linters, formatters)
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 · 90 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A faca1da3bfa2
code-quality-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository LEEI1337/phantom-neural-cortex (5 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 467 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
find-security-vulnerabilities-in-code
Find security vulnerabilities in a codebase or repository with Strix — a white-box AI security review that reads your source, reasons about the actual data flow and authorization model, then exploits what it finds in a live sandbox so every reported issue has a working proof-of-concept instead of a noisy…
adk-go-self-review
Review an ADK Go change the way a maintainer will — a fresh-context pass over the whole diff, five lenses (correctness and tests, scope, simplicity, style, adk-python parity), and the mutation check that proves your tests pin the change. Use before opening a PR, before any later push that changes code, and when asked…
verify-change
A change-checking skill that reviews code differences and checks whether related documentation, tests, and records were updated.
verify-quality
A code-quality checker that measures complexity, size, naming, and common code smells. It reports problems such as duplicated code, unused code, and overly long functions.
spec-kitty-runtime-review
Review runtime-owned outputs using the Spec Kitty review workflow surface, then direct approval or rejection with structured feedback. Triggers: "review this work package", "check runtime output", "approve this step", "review WP", "is this WP ready to approve", "check this implementation". Does NOT handle: setup-only…
code-review-csharp
Perform structured code reviews of C# source code covering naming conventions, performance, security, readability, and .NET best practices. Trigger phrases include "review this C# code", "check my C# for best practices", "analyze this C# class", "find issues in my C# code".