Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to MDGrey33/claude_mind. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MDGrey33/claude_mind/main/.claude/skills/code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MDGrey33/claude_mindWrote 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/mdgrey33/claude_mind/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mdgrey33/claude_mind/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mdgrey33/claude_mind/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/mdgrey33/claude_mind/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mdgrey33/claude_mind/code-review.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 | $0.01990 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00796 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00398 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00199 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 343 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Skill
Purpose
Perform thorough code reviews to ensure high-quality, secure, maintainable code before delivery. This skill is invoked automatically when code needs review.
When to Use This Skill
- Reviewing pull requests or code changes
- Validating implementation against requirements
- Ensuring code follows project standards
- Identifying potential bugs or issues
- Checking for security vulnerabilities
Review Process
Step 1: Understand Context
Before reviewing code:
- Read the associated technical specification
- Understand what the code is supposed to do
- Review acceptance criteria
- Check related architecture decisions (ADRs)
Step 2: Code Quality Review
Readability
- Code is well-formatted and consistent
- Variable and function names are descriptive
- Complex logic is commented
- No dead code or commented-out code
- Consistent indentation and style
Structure
- Functions are focused and do one thing
- Files are appropriately sized (<500 lines)
- Appropriate separation of concerns
- Clear module boundaries
- Proper use of abstraction
Error Handling
- All error cases handled
- Errors logged appropriately
- User-friendly error messages
- No silent failures
- Proper exception types used
Step 3: Security Review
Input Validation
- All user inputs validated
- Validation happens server-side (not just client)
- SQL injection prevention (parameterized queries)
- XSS prevention (output encoding)
- CSRF protection where needed
Authentication & Authorization
- Authentication required for protected endpoints
- Authorization checks proper permissions
- No hardcoded credentials
- Secure password handling (hashing, not plaintext)
- Session management secure
Data Protection
- Sensitive data encrypted at rest
- Sensitive data encrypted in transit (HTTPS)
- No sensitive data in logs
- Proper data access controls
- No exposure of internal details in errors
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 · 343 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 628cf4104f3e
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository MDGrey33/claude_mind (2 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 1,990 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
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"…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…