mcaf-code-review

A guide for preparing and reviewing pull requests, which are proposed code changes submitted for team review. It covers change scope, reviewer expectations, checklists, and merge practices.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to shape a pull request, create review rules or templates, check related tests and docs, and decide whether a change is ready to merge.
Why use it?
It helps catch unclear scope, missing tests or documentation, and changes that are not ready for review. It gives authors and reviewers a shared way to judge the change.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

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/managedcode/mcpgateway/mcaf-code-review
Any agent
npx skills add managedcode/MCPGateway --skill mcaf-code-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/managedcode/MCPGateway

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 48 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 826 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 $0.00048 $0.00826
Opus 5 $0.00024 $0.00413
Sonnet 5 $0.00010 $0.00165
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00083

Measured yesterday against content hash 86ec886f3ea2, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 yesterday.

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 mcaf-code-review — 21 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.

.codex/skills/mcaf-code-review/SKILL.md · 100 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

MCAF: Code Review

Trigger On

  • shaping PR review policy
  • preparing a change for review
  • auditing whether a change is actually review-ready
  • tightening reviewer expectations or templates

Value

  • produce a concrete project delta: code, docs, config, tests, CI, or review artifact
  • reduce ambiguity through explicit planning, verification, and final validation skills
  • leave reusable project context so future tasks are faster and safer

Do Not Use For

  • implementing the code change itself
  • generic team-process work with no PR or review component

Inputs

  • the diff or planned PR scope
  • tests, docs, and architecture notes affected by the change
  • current review template or review policy, if any

Quick Start

  1. Read the nearest AGENTS.md and confirm scope and constraints.
  2. Run this skill's Workflow through the Ralph Loop until outcomes are acceptable.
  3. Return the Required Result Format with concrete artifacts and verification evidence.

Workflow

  1. Confirm the change is small enough to review coherently. Split if needed.
  2. Check that tests, docs, and architecture notes moved with the code.
  3. Review in this order:
    • behavioural risk
    • design and maintainability
    • test quality
    • operational or security impact
  4. If the repo needs review policy or a template, define it in-repo.
  5. Keep reviewer guidance concrete. Avoid vague "review carefully" language.

Deliver

  • review-ready pull requests
  • review guidance that is specific and enforceable
  • findings tied to behaviour, design, testing, and risk

Validate

  • the review guidance tells reviewers what to check, not just that they should check
  • PR scope is understandable without opening the whole repo
  • tests and docs are part of review readiness, not afterthoughts

Ralph Loop

Use the Ralph Loop for every task, including docs, architecture, testing, and tooling work.

  1. Plan first (mandatory):
    • analyze current state
    • define target outcome, constraints, and risks
    • write a detailed execution plan
    • list final validation skills to run at the end, with order and reason
  2. Execute one planned step and produce a concrete delta.
  3. Review the result and capture findings with actionable next fixes.
  4. Apply fixes in small batches and rerun the relevant checks or review steps.
  5. Update the plan after each iteration.
  6. Repeat until outcomes are acceptable or only explicit exceptions remain.
  7. If a dependency is missing, bootstrap it or return status: not_applicable with explicit reason and fallback path.

Read the full file on GitHub · 100 lines

Files

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.

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. yesterday First seen · 100 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 86ec886f3ea2

Subscribe to this mod's changes

mcaf-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository managedcode/MCPGateway (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 826 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to mcaf-code-review, differing in 21 lines, and is treated as a copy.