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/marconae/speq-skill/speq-code-reviewnpx skills add marconae/speq-skill --skill speq-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/marconae/speq-skillWrote 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/marconae/speq-skill/speq-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/marconae/speq-skill/speq-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/marconae/speq-skill/speq-code-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00052 | $0.01848 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00924 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00370 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00185 |
Grade A, and why
speq-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 116 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Taxonomy
Analyze each changed file for the categories below.
Non-goal: a deviation the brief notes as authorized by an active project hook (e.g. a skipped guardrail, a relaxed convention) is a settled, intentional choice — don't raise it as a finding under any category below.
1. Guardrail Violations
Per /speq-code-guardrails:
[TOO_MANY_ARGUMENTS]— more than 3 arguments[SIDE_EFFECT]— function has side effects[BOOLEAN_FLAG_PARAMETER]— boolean flag parameter[MAGIC_NUMBER]— magic number without a named constant (standing in for a failure, it's[SENTINEL_ERROR_VALUE], not this tag)[MISSING_DOC_COMMENT]— missing doc comment on a public interface[INLINE_COMMENT]— inline comment present (TODOs and other work-tracking comments are[WORK_TRACKING_COMMENT], not this tag)[SELECTOR_ARGUMENT]— an argument (of any type, not just boolean) that picks which branch a function takes[OUTPUT_PARAMETER]— a value returned via a mutated argument instead of the return value[MIXED_ABSTRACTION_LEVEL]— a function mixes high-level orchestration with low-level detail[COMMAND_QUERY_MIX]— a single call both mutates something and hands back an answer[WEASEL_NAME]— a name that states no responsibility (Manager, Processor, Handler, Data, Info, Util)[IMPLEMENTATION_IN_NAME]— a name that bakes in a transport, vendor, or format instead of the abstraction
2. Dead Code
[UNUSED_FUNCTION]— unused function or method[UNREACHABLE_CODE]— unreachable code path[UNUSED_IMPORT]— import not used[UNUSED_VARIABLE]— variable assigned but never read
3. Test Quality
Per /speq-code-guardrails' Tests section — tests are quality subjects, not only removal candidates:
[OBSOLETE_TEST]— tests removed functionality[DUPLICATE_TEST]— duplicate test coverage[ASSERTION_FREE_TEST]— test always passes, no assertions[VAGUE_TEST_NAME]— test name doesn't state the condition and expected behavior[NONDETERMINISTIC_TEST]— test depends on real clock, network, filesystem, or unseeded randomness[IMPLEMENTATION_COUPLED_TEST]— test asserts internal state instead of observable behavior[UNTESTED_ERROR_PATH]— a failure path with no test[MISSING_BOUNDARY_TEST]— no test for empty, single, maximum, off-by-one, or transition input[SKIPPED_TEST]— test is skipped or ignored rather than fixed or deleted[SUPPRESSED_WARNING]— a lint or compiler warning is silenced instead of resolved
What ships with it
1 file 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 First seen · 116 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 4a5888a573c1
speq-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository marconae/speq-skill (50 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 1,848 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
build-executor
Govern implementation from an approved execution contract. Invoke when execution-contract.md is approved and the user wants disciplined build work, TDD execution, or guarded batch-by-batch implementation.
workflow-start
Primary entry point for the spec-superflow state-machine workflow. Invoke when the user is inside an active spec-superflow change directory (look for .spec-superflow.yaml, changes/ /, proposal.md, specs/, design.md, tasks.md, or execution-contract.md) and asks to start, continue, resume, implement, plan, or figure out…
release-archivist
Close out a spec-superflow change with verification, summary, and archive readiness. Invoke when implementation is complete, verification is underway, or the user asks for a final wrap-up.
bug-investigator
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior during spec-superflow execution, before proposing fixes. Invoked automatically when build-executor hits a blockage.
contract-builder
Convert approved planning artifacts into an execution contract. Invoke when the user wants to start building, asks to move from planning to implementation, or when execution-contract.md is missing or stale.
need-explorer
Clarify intent, scope, constraints, and success criteria before artifact creation. Invoke when the request is fuzzy, the user is comparing options, or the workflow needs a stable change definition before writing artifacts.