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/matrixfounder/agentic-development/code-review-checklistnpx skills add MatrixFounder/Agentic-development --skill code-review-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MatrixFounder/Agentic-developmentWhat 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 | $0.00021 | $0.01045 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00522 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00209 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-checklist 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Checklist
1. Task Compliance
- Requirements: Fulfills all "Changes Description" items?
- Acceptance Criteria: Met?
- Use Cases: Main scenario works?
2. Implementation Quality
- Top-Down/Stubs:
- Stub Task: Returns hardcoded values? NO logic? E2E checks hardcode?
- Impl Task: Real logic replaces stub? E2E updated?
- No Duplication: used existing methods/helpers?
- Error Handling: Exceptions caught and logged?
- Code Smells: No magic numbers, understandable names?
- Dead Code: Before proposing a deletion — symbol grepped repo-wide? (callout below)
Before acting on a "remove dead code" finding
- Grep the symbol repo-wide — never scope the search to a test directory. Tests are not always in one: Go keeps
*_test.gobeside the source, Rust puts unit tests inline under#[cfg(test)], JS/TS co-locates*.spec.ts/__tests__/, Python usestests/, Foundry usestest/*.t.sol. A directory-scoped grep returns "nothing depends on it" precisely where that answer is wrong.- If a test drives it, the fix is not deletion — make production reach the branch (wire the flag, pass the parameter) so code and requirement agree.
- Report it as "unreachable and covered by test X", not "dead, delete". A finding can be right about the smell and wrong about the fix.
3. Documentation "First"
- Directory Docs:
.AGENTS.mdupdated for touched source directories under memory tracking policy (or bootstrap step recorded)? - Docstrings: Present for new classes/methods? (Google/JSDoc)
- Project Docs: README updated if architecture changed?
- Positional references: If this change touches BOTH an artifact and a document citing it by
line/offset/ordinal — were those references re-checked against the final state of the
change, and is any pre-edit quotation tagged with its revision? (
documentation-standards§4.1) The reviewer owns this one: the author's own check passes even when it ran too early.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 76 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 17080829b785
code-review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository MatrixFounder/Agentic-development (5 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,045 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
argent-tv-interact
Control and inspect TV apps via argent — Apple TV (tvOS), Android TV (leanback), and Amazon Fire TV (Vega). Boot the target, read focus, navigate with the D-pad remote, type, screenshot, and on Vega debug the JS runtime (evaluate, console logs, network inspector). Use when a task targets a TV (runtimeKind "tv", or…
review-offered-task
Review a task that has been offered to you and decide whether to accept or reject it.
company-hiring-intelligence
Reverse-engineer what a company is building by scraping their job postings, careers page, LinkedIn Jobs, and engineering blog using TinyFish web agents. Use whenever a user wants to understand a company's strategic direction from hiring signals, do competitive intelligence, figure out a tech stack from job…
文档协作
引导用户通过结构化的文档共同编写工作流程。当用户想撰写文档、提案、技术规范、决策文档或类似结构化内容时使用。该工作流程帮助用户高效传递上下文，通过迭代优化内容，并验证文档对读者有效。当用户提到写文档、创建提案、起草规范或类似文档任务时触发。.
aidd-dev:08:for-sure
Iterative agent loop that tracks attempts and retries until a success condition is met. Use when the user says "for sure", "make sure", "keep trying until", "loop until done", "don't stop until", or needs guaranteed completion of a task with explicit success criteria.
Swift Performance Optimization Skill
Use when investigating measured Swift or Apple-platform regressions in CPU, memory, launch, scrolling, animation hitches, image processing, energy, networking, or concurrency, or when designing performance tests and Instruments experiments. Do not use for speculative micro-optimization, ordinary refactoring, or a…