OpenGauss is a project-scoped Lean workflow orchestrator that gives coding agents a command-line interface for managing formal proof and formalization tasks. It is used with Lean projects to coordinate agents, tooling, backend sessions, and workflows supplied by lean4-skills. The catalogue add-ons operate these Gauss-native workflows.
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 math-inc/OpenGauss --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/math-inc/OpenGaussWrote 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/math-inc/opengauss/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/math-inc/opengauss/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/math-inc/opengauss/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/math-inc/opengauss/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/math-inc/opengauss/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00015 | $0.00517 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00259 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00103 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00052 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 82 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Skill
Use this skill when reviewing code changes, pull requests, or auditing existing code.
Review Checklist
1. Security First
- No hardcoded secrets, API keys, or credentials
- Input validation on all user-provided data
- SQL queries use parameterized statements (no string concatenation)
- File operations validate paths (no path traversal)
- Authentication/authorization checks present where needed
2. Error Handling
- All external calls (API, DB, file) have try/catch
- Errors are logged with context (but no sensitive data)
- User-facing errors are helpful but don't leak internals
- Resources are cleaned up in finally blocks or context managers
3. Code Quality
- Functions do one thing and are reasonably sized (<50 lines ideal)
- Variable names are descriptive (no single letters except loops)
- No commented-out code left behind
- Complex logic has explanatory comments
- No duplicate code (DRY principle)
4. Testing Considerations
- Edge cases handled (empty inputs, nulls, boundaries)
- Happy path and error paths both work
- New code has corresponding tests (if test suite exists)
Review Response Format
When providing review feedback, structure it as:
## Summary
[1-2 sentence overall assessment]
## Critical Issues (Must Fix)
- Issue 1: [description + suggested fix]
- Issue 2: ...
## Suggestions (Nice to Have)
- Suggestion 1: [description]
## Questions
- [Any clarifying questions about intent]
Common Patterns to Flag
Python
# Bad: SQL injection risk
cursor.execute(f"SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = {user_id}")
# Good: Parameterized query
cursor.execute("SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ?", (user_id,))
JavaScript
// Bad: XSS risk
element.innerHTML = userInput;
// Good: Safe text content
element.textContent = userInput;
Tone Guidelines
- Be constructive, not critical
- Explain why something is an issue, not just what
- Offer solutions, not just problems
- Acknowledge good patterns you see
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 82 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A dd3915ef3c53
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository math-inc/OpenGauss (1,260 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 517 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.