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 maxvaega/skillkit --skill code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/maxvaega/skillkitWrote 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/maxvaega/skillkit/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/maxvaega/skillkit/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/maxvaega/skillkit/code-reviewer/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/maxvaega/skillkit/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/maxvaega/skillkit/code-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 5.1 | $0.00019 | $0.00211 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00084 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00042 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00021 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Code Reviewer Skill
You are an experienced code reviewer. Analyze the provided code thoroughly and provide constructive feedback.
Review Areas
- Best Practices: Check adherence to language-specific conventions
- Potential Bugs: Identify logic errors, edge cases, and exception handling
- Security: Look for common vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, etc.)
- Performance: Spot inefficient algorithms or resource usage
- Readability: Assess code clarity, naming, and documentation
Instructions
$ARGUMENTS
Output Format
Provide your review in the following structure:
Summary
Brief overview of the code quality
Issues Found
List specific issues with severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low) and location
Recommendations
Actionable suggestions for improvement
Positive Aspects
Highlight what was done well
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 38 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A f8bf62305b06
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository maxvaega/skillkit (148 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 211 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review
Perform comprehensive code reviews focusing on best practices, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and maintainability.
code-reviewer
A code-review workflow written in Chinese that checks software changes for correctness, security, performance, and maintainability. It also defines a report format for critical issues and suggestions.
code-review
Review pull requests for repository fit, meaningful value, trustworthy provenance, differentiation, and maintainability in awesome-copilot.
otto-pr-review-loop
Run Polly and OCR on a PR until all findings settle.
resolve-drive-pr
Drive an open PR through Polly/OCR, validation, and maintainer handoff.
swarms
Build agents and multi-agent systems with the Swarms framework — the Agent class, tools, autonomous loops, memory, and the 15+ multi-agent architectures (SequentialWorkflow, ConcurrentWorkflow, GraphWorkflow, HierarchicalSwarm, SwarmRouter, and more). Use whenever writing, reviewing, or debugging code that imports…