code-review-and-quality

code-review-and-quality is a skill for Claude Code, Cursor from mamahoos/dot-files. It costs 51 tokens per session (4,365 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of code-review-and-quality, MIT.

A multi-part code review guide covering correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance before a change is merged. Merging means adding the reviewed change to the main codebase.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before merging features, refactors, bug fixes, or other changes, and when checking whether tests cover the behaviour being changed.
Why use it?
It provides a consistent quality check for code written by a person or another agent, including tests and error cases.

Skill for Claude CodeCursor

Written for Claude Code and Cursor: disable-model-invocation in frontmatter, but also installed under .cursor/.

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/mamahoos/dot-files/code-review-and-quality
Any agent
npx skills add mamahoos/dot-files --skill code-review-and-quality
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mamahoos/dot-files

Made for: Claude Code, Cursor.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for code-review-and-quality

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mamahoos/dot-files/code-review-and-quality.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/mamahoos/dot-files/code-review-and-quality)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mamahoos/dot-files/code-review-and-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mamahoos/dot-files/code-review-and-quality.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 51 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 4,365 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 97% copy Near-identical to another mod 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 5.1 $0.00051 $0.04365
Opus 5 $0.00026 $0.02183
Sonnet 5 $0.00010 $0.00873
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00436

Measured 6d ago against content hash cdd241bc1bd7, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-06, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-review-and-quality 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 6d 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.

Origin

This is a copy

97% identical to code-review-and-quality — 1 line 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.

home/.cursor/skills/code-review-and-quality/SKILL.md · 398 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 398 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Review and Quality

Overview

Multi-dimensional code review with quality gates. Every change gets reviewed before merge — no exceptions. Review covers five axes: correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance.

The approval standard: Approve a change when it definitely improves overall code health, even if it isn't perfect. Perfect code doesn't exist — the goal is continuous improvement. Don't block a change because it isn't exactly how you would have written it. If it improves the codebase and follows the project's conventions, approve it.

When to Use

  • Before merging any PR or change
  • After completing a feature implementation
  • When another agent or model produced code you need to evaluate
  • When refactoring existing code
  • After any bug fix (review both the fix and the regression test)

The Five-Axis Review

Every review evaluates code across these dimensions:

1. Correctness

Does the code do what it claims to do?

  • Does it match the spec or task requirements?
  • Are edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values)?
  • Are error paths handled (not just the happy path)?
  • Does it pass all tests? Are the tests actually testing the right things?
  • Are there off-by-one errors, race conditions, or state inconsistencies?

2. Readability & Simplicity

Can another engineer (or agent) understand this code without the author explaining it?

  • Are names descriptive and consistent with project conventions? (No temp, data, result without context)
  • Is the control flow straightforward (avoid nested ternaries, deep callbacks)?
  • Is the code organized logically (related code grouped, clear module boundaries)?
  • Are there any "clever" tricks that should be simplified?
  • Could this be done in fewer lines? (1000 lines where 100 suffice is a failure)
  • Are abstractions earning their complexity? (Don't generalize until the third use case)
  • Would comments help clarify non-obvious intent? (But don't comment obvious code.)
  • Are there dead code artifacts: no-op variables (_unused), backwards-compat shims, or // removed comments?
  • Is a new conditional bolted onto an unrelated flow? That's a design smell, not a nit — push the logic into its own helper, state, or policy instead of tangling an existing path.
  • Do repeated conditionals on the same shape appear? They signal a missing model or dispatcher. A "temporary" branch is usually permanent debt.

Read the full file on GitHub · 398 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. 6d ago First seen · 398 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A cdd241bc1bd7

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review-and-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository mamahoos/dot-files (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 4,365 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to code-review-and-quality, differing in 1 line, and is treated as a copy.