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 mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skillsWrote 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/mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills/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/mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills/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 | $0.00048 | $0.02127 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00851 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00425 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00213 |
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 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 — 345 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer Skill
This skill provides thorough code review capabilities across all programming languages and frameworks. Use this whenever you need to analyze code for quality, security, performance, or maintainability concerns.
Review Scope
When reviewing code, analyze across these dimensions:
1. Security Analysis
- Identify potential security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, CSRF, etc.)
- Check for hardcoded credentials, API keys, or sensitive data
- Verify proper input validation and sanitization
- Review authentication and authorization implementations
- Check for insecure cryptographic practices
- Identify potential data leakage points
2. Bug Detection
- Identify logical errors and edge cases
- Check for null/undefined reference errors
- Detect off-by-one errors and boundary conditions
- Identify race conditions and concurrency issues
- Check for memory leaks and resource management
- Verify error handling and exception management
3. Performance Issues
- Identify inefficient algorithms and data structures
- Detect N+1 query problems in database operations
- Check for unnecessary loops and redundant operations
- Identify memory-intensive operations
- Review caching strategies and opportunities
- Analyze computational complexity (Big O)
4. Code Quality & Best Practices
- Verify adherence to language-specific conventions
- Check code readability and maintainability
- Identify code duplication and suggest DRY improvements
- Review naming conventions (variables, functions, classes)
- Check function/method length and complexity
- Verify proper separation of concerns
- Assess test coverage and testability
5. Architecture & Design
- Review design patterns usage and appropriateness
- Check for SOLID principles violations
- Identify tight coupling and low cohesion
- Review dependency management
- Assess scalability considerations
- Check for proper abstraction layers
Review Process
Follow this structured approach when reviewing code:
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 · 345 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 6845627bec2b
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills (2 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 2,127 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
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…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…