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 agentmods add skills/luizedupp/rememb/code-reviewernpx skills add LuizEduPP/Rememb --skill code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LuizEduPP/RemembWhat 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 | $0.00065 | $0.01187 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00593 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00237 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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.
This is a copy
89% identical to code-reviewer — 24 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 198 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
Automated code review tools for analyzing pull requests, detecting code quality issues, and generating review reports.
Table of Contents
Tools
PR Analyzer
Analyzes git diff between branches to assess review complexity and identify risks.
# Analyze current branch against main
python scripts/pr_analyzer.py /path/to/repo
# Compare specific branches
python scripts/pr_analyzer.py . --base main --head feature-branch
# JSON output for integration
python scripts/pr_analyzer.py /path/to/repo --json
What it detects:
- Hardcoded secrets (passwords, API keys, tokens)
- SQL injection patterns (string concatenation in queries)
- Debug statements (debugger, console.log)
- ESLint rule disabling
- TypeScript
anytypes - TODO/FIXME comments
Output includes:
- Complexity score (1-10)
- Risk categorization (critical, high, medium, low)
- File prioritization for review order
- Commit message validation
Code Quality Checker
Analyzes source code for structural issues, code smells, and SOLID violations.
# Analyze a directory
python scripts/code_quality_checker.py /path/to/code
# Analyze specific language
python scripts/code_quality_checker.py . --language python
# JSON output
python scripts/code_quality_checker.py /path/to/code --json
What it detects:
- Long functions (>50 lines)
- Large files (>500 lines)
- God classes (>20 methods)
- Deep nesting (>4 levels)
- Too many parameters (>5)
- High cyclomatic complexity
- Missing error handling
- Unused imports
- Magic numbers
Thresholds:
| Issue | Threshold |
|---|---|
| Long function | >50 lines |
| Large file | >500 lines |
| God class | >20 methods |
| Too many params | >5 |
| Deep nesting | >4 levels |
| High complexity | >10 branches |
What ships with it
6 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 198 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A ba4a2d057513
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository LuizEduPP/Rememb (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 1,187 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to code-reviewer, differing in 24 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
claude-api
Build, debug, and optimize Claude API / Anthropic SDK apps. Apps built with this skill should include prompt caching. Also handles migrating existing Claude API code between Claude model versions (4.5 → 4.6, 4.6 → 4.7, retired-model replacements). TRIGGER when: code imports anthropic/@anthropic-ai/sdk; user asks for…
agent-coordination
Find other agents, list participants in a conversation, send routed messages, attach files, and recover earlier conversation context (history / resolve a fuzzy reference / read a quoted message / read compressed summaries). Use whenever you need to delegate to another agent, address a peer in a multi-agent…
image-generate
Generate an image from a text prompt via the cloud LLM image proxy, persist it as a content-addressed workspace asset, and return a ContentBlock that downstream renderers can attach. Use whenever the user asks "draw / generate / make an image of …", an agent needs a diagram / illustration as a follow-up artifact, or a…
claim-agent-ownership
Orchestrator skill for resolving multi-daemon binding contention. Use when you (the orchestrator) detect an agent.binding.contested sync event indicating two daemons are racing for the same agent — explicitly rebind ownership to a chosen target daemon so subsequent dispatches route deterministically. Implements Gap…
prismer-im-collab
Coordinate reliably in Prismer conversations, use workspace assets through bounded MCP tools, and keep task work on the board.
human-approval
Request human approval before performing a SAFETY-CRITICAL, IRREVERSIBLE, or SCOPE-EXPANDING action — submit a structured context (action, scope, risk, consequence) plus options, then STOP the current turn. The platform redispatches the agent after the human decides. NEVER use for routine deliverables (writing docs /…