code-review

A code-review workflow that uses several focused reviewers to inspect changes against a chosen Git branch. It covers architecture, correctness, security, maintainability, performance, and responses to findings.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a branch or diff, investigate review findings, challenge proposed conclusions, and validate design boundaries and API contracts.
Why use it?
It provides structured review of a change instead of relying on one general inspection. It also records decisions when a reported issue is intentionally left unfixed.

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/martinffx/atelier/code-review
Any agent
npx skills add martinffx/atelier --skill code-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/martinffx/atelier

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 112 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,009 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found 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 $0.00112 $0.01009
Opus 5 $0.00056 $0.00504
Sonnet 5 $0.00022 $0.00202
Haiku 4.5 $0.00011 $0.00101

Measured 2d ago against content hash 13d9e37d1120, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

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 2d 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.

skills/code-review/SKILL.md · 107 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Review Skill

Multi-agent code analysis with a simplicity gate, focused reviewers, and challenge validation.

Uses explicit subagent dispatch patterns from code-subagents.

Prerequisites

  • Required: git

Arguments

Command Routing

Invocation Behavior
(no arguments) Review diff to main branch
rq Review diff to main branch
rq main Review diff to main branch
rq develop Review diff to develop branch
feat/foo Review diff to feat/foo (bare branch = rq)
rs Respond to review findings (interview mode)

Subagent Architecture

Use these concrete harness subagent types. If an exact match is unavailable, use the most correct available subagent based on the harness-provided descriptions.

subagent_type Purpose
sentinel Triage only: changed-file analysis, context retrieval, reviewer selection
oracle Reviewer personas, evidence-based critique, failure-mode analysis, challenge validation
architect Architecture, design-boundary, data-model, and API-contract review

Reviewer names such as Security, Correctness, Maintainability, and PerformanceOperator are prompt personas, not subagent types. Do not use general; it is not a harness agent.

Simplicity is a mandatory reviewer persona for migrations, refactors, and architectural changes. Run it before the other reviewers; do not include it in the parallel reviewer batch.

Review Priority

Review in this order:

  1. User goal and prior behavior
  2. Necessity and deletion
  3. Correctness and security
  4. Architecture
  5. SDD compliance

Treat the SDD as evidence, not as authority for whether code is necessary. A finding that would expand behavior or infrastructure requires user approval. Never apply it as an ordinary review fix.

rq (Request Review) Subagents

Step Parallel Purpose
1. Triage No Detect context, select reviewers, identify relevant skills to look for
2. Simplicity No Mandatory necessity and deletion review for migrations, refactors, and architectural changes
3. Reviewers Yes (per reviewer) Correctness, security, and other specialty analysis
4. Synthesis No Deduplicate findings inline
5. Architect No Architecture review
6. SDD + Challenge No Check SDD compliance last, then validate findings

Read the full file on GitHub · 107 lines

Files

What ships with it

4 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. 2d ago First seen · 107 lines · 112 tokens per session scan A 13d9e37d1120

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository martinffx/atelier (44 stars, last pushed 23d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 112 tokens to every session and 1,009 once invoked, about $0.0006 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.