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 majiang213/OpenClaw-MAS --skill cmd_code_reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/majiang213/OpenClaw-MASWrote 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/majiang213/openclaw-mas/cmd_code_review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/majiang213/openclaw-mas/cmd_code_review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/majiang213/openclaw-mas/cmd_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/majiang213/openclaw-mas/cmd_code_review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/majiang213/openclaw-mas/cmd_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 | $0.00026 | $0.00253 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00127 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00051 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00025 |
Grade A, and why
cmd_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.
What it actually says
Delegate to the code-reviewer agent.
Include in the task payload:
- Project path (the absolute path the user provided as the first argument)
- Whether this is a local review (uncommitted changes) or a PR review
- PR number or URL if reviewing a GitHub PR
- Specific files, modules, or areas of concern if any
- Tech stack and any project-specific conventions
First, reply to the user briefly to confirm you are delegating to code-reviewer.
Then call sessions_spawn:
{
"agentId": "code-reviewer",
"sessionKey": "code-reviewer",
"task": "<user's full request and all relevant context — the agent cannot see this conversation>",
"runTimeoutSeconds": 0
}
After sessions_spawn returns, relay the result to the user. Do not output anything after the spawn call until the result arrives.
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 First seen · 33 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 201a21f2aea3
cmd_code_review is a skill published in the GitHub repository majiang213/OpenClaw-MAS (5 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 253 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
resolve-pr-comments
Evaluate, fix, answer, and reply to GitHub pull request review comments and conversation comments. Handles both change requests (fix or skip) and reviewer questions (explain using reasoning recalled from past Claude Code transcripts). Use when the user asks to "resolve PR comments", "fix review comments", "address PR…
fetch-pr-comments
Fetch and summarize review feedback and conversation from a GitHub PR (unresolved review threads, review bodies, and PR conversation comments) without making changes. Use when the user asks to "fetch PR comments", "show PR comments", "check PR for unresolved comments", "list review comments", "what comments are on the…
reply-to-pr-threads
Draft, confirm, and post replies to GitHub PR review threads. Handles per-category reply formatting, re-fetches thread resolution state so auto-resolved threads are skipped, and posts via GraphQL. Use when the user asks to "reply to PR threads", "post PR thread replies", or "draft PR reply messages".
reply-to-pr-conversation
Draft, confirm, and post a single conversational reply to GitHub PR conversation comments (issue comments). The reply addresses all tracked items in one natural-prose message. Use when the user asks to "reply to PR conversation", "post PR conversation replies", or "draft PR conversation messages".
openclaw-github-dedupe
Investigate a cluster of GitHub issues and PRs, determine canonical candidates, post duplicate/related status, preserve contributor credit, and execute cleanup actions. Supports autonomous mode for provided-link-only closeout, merge/fix follow-through, changelog, and post-merge issue/PR cleanup.
pr-creator
Creates or updates GitHub PRs with house-style titles and bodies, issue linking, repository templates, and draft state. Use when asked to "create a PR", "rewrite the PR description", or "polish this PR". For code fixes use tidy; for CI and review threads use pr-babysitter; for npm releases use autoship.