A review procedure for OpenClaw Machines changes that checks how code behaves across its callers, dependencies, tests, configuration, and deployment assumptions.

Reviewing pull requests, checking proposed fixes, resolving review comments, and deciding whether a change is correct and belongs in the right code boundary.

It helps reveal bugs or unsafe changes that a quick review of the edited lines might miss, and asks for focused evidence behind bug fixes.

How mathaix/OpenClawMachines configures Claude Code and Codex

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to mathaix/OpenClawMachines. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file

curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mathaix/OpenClawMachines/main/.agents/skills/ocm-review/SKILL.md

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mathaix/OpenClawMachines

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mathaix/openclawmachines/ocm-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/mathaix/openclawmachines/ocm-review)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mathaix/openclawmachines/ocm-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mathaix/openclawmachines/ocm-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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mathaix/openclawmachines/ocm-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mathaix/openclawmachines/ocm-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 29 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 548 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.

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.

Model	Per session	Once invoked
Fable 5.1	$0.00029	$0.00548
Opus 5.5	$0.00012	$0.00219
Sonnet 5.5	$0.00006	$0.00110
Haiku 4.5	$0.00003	$0.00055

Measured 2mo ago against content hash 493c3e0e9179, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

ocm-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 2mo 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.

.agents/skills/ocm-review/SKILL.md · 68 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

OCM Review

Use this skill for PR review, review-comment resolution, post-fix review, or any request asking whether a change is correct, safe, or the best fix.

Review Posture

Review behavior, not prose. A convincing PR description is not proof. Read the real code path, adjacent tests, docs, and deployment assumptions before giving a verdict.

Required Pass

State what the change does and why the surface matters.
Read the changed files plus enough surrounding code to identify:
- runtime entry point
- owner module
- one caller
- one callee
- sibling surfaces that should share the invariant
- adjacent tests
- relevant config/docs
Compare with current origin/main behavior when regression or compatibility matters.
For dependency-backed behavior, read official docs/source/types instead of relying on memory.
Decide whether the patch is the best owner-boundary fix or only a plausible mitigation.
Require focused proof for bug fixes: reproduction/log/failing test when practical, root cause in code, fix touching the implicated path, and a regression test or explicit reason no test was added.

OCM-Specific Checks

Local/operator paths must not depend on hosted-only Cloudflare, GCP, Firebase, or private-domain defaults.
Every VM path must preserve the gateway/proxy token and signing-key contract.
Worker origins must not point back at hostnames served by the same Worker route.
User-facing machine access must go through the configured data-plane protection model; do not expose KVM worker hosts directly.
Host enrollment must keep workers authenticated as infrastructure, not human users.
Runtime/rootfs changes need guest-init and agent-client compatibility checks.
Public-core changes must not add billing, commercial plan enforcement, or private hosted overlay assumptions.

Output Shape

Use this compact structure:

Findings: ordered by severity with file/line references.
Best-fix verdict: best / acceptable mitigation / wrong layer / too narrow / too broad.
Alternatives considered: one to three concrete alternatives and why they were rejected.
Code read: main files/contracts inspected.
Proof: tests, logs, or commands checked.
Remaining uncertainty: what was not proven.

Read the full file on GitHub · 68 lines

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.

2mo ago First seen · 68 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 493c3e0e9179

Subscribe to this mod's changes

ocm-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository mathaix/OpenClawMachines (62 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 548 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.

Code review LLM agent-infrastructure ai-agents firecracker kvm

ocm-review next to 6 skills from other repositories
Mod	Type	Stars	Last push	Licence	Scan	Tokens	Works with
ocm-reviewmathaix/OpenClawMachines	Skill	62	3mo ago	Apache-2.0	A	29	Claude Code, Codex
harness-loopjoymin5655/Agent	Skill	2	yesterday	MIT	A	98	Claude Code
otto-pr-review-loopomnigent-ai/omnigent	Skill	11k	yesterday	Apache-2.0	A	17	Claude Code, Codex
architecture-reviewlangwatch/langwatch	Skill	5.0k	yesterday	Apache-2.0	A	172	Claude Code
meta-codereview-current-diffopensquilla/opensquilla	Skill	7.1k	6d ago	Apache-2.0	A	73	Claude Code, Codex
prs-awaiting-maintainerdyoshikawa/rulesync	Skill	1.6k	yesterday	MIT	A	56	Claude Code, Codex
review-exportSnowflake-Labs/cocoplus	Skill	727	2d ago	MIT	A	0	Claude Code

OpenClawMachines: Skill for Claude Code