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 managedcode/MCAF --skill mcaf-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/managedcode/MCAFWrote 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/managedcode/mcaf/mcaf-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/managedcode/mcaf/mcaf-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/managedcode/mcaf/mcaf-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/managedcode/mcaf/mcaf-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/managedcode/mcaf/mcaf-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 | $0.00037 | $0.00499 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00200 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00100 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
mcaf-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 5d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed CC-BY-4.0
The repository is licensed CC-BY-4.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
What ships with it
5 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.
- 5d ago Changed · -81 lines · -11 tokens per session 413666566c74
- 1mo ago First seen · 111 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 70c12018bef9
mcaf-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository managedcode/MCAF (56 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed CC-BY-4.0. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 499 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
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-module
A module-checking skill that scans a project’s folders, code, and documentation. It expects each module to include a README.md and DESIGN.md, which explain how the module is used and why it was designed that way.
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.
red-team-review
Unified adversarial review, two modes. Strategic Matrix v4.3 (MTA-004) for arguments/plans/decisions: Priors → Rubric → Adversarial Lenses → SWOT/TOWS → MCDA → Blind Spot/Kill Switch → Summary. Deliverable Audit for built artefacts (assignments, reports, code outputs): isolated fresh-context hunt against the brief…
decision-journal
Unified decision lifecycle: Pre-decision logging, post-decision review, failure classification, and calibration tracking. Absorbs: post-mortem-engine.