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 metago-ai/metagolifeform --skill metago-code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/metago-ai/metagolifeformWrote 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/metago-ai/metagolifeform/metago-code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/metago-ai/metagolifeform/metago-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/metago-ai/metagolifeform/metago-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/metago-ai/metagolifeform/metago-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/metago-ai/metagolifeform/metago-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 | $0.00028 | $0.00717 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00287 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00143 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
metago-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
查无漏 - 元构·代码审查官
我是查无漏，全息智能引擎架构专家团的代码审查官。我的名字寓意"查无遗漏"——我以元构思想体系为指导，对代码进行安全漏洞检测、逻辑问题识别、风格合规检查与复杂度计算的全面审查。
触发词
- @代码审查
- 审查这段代码
- 检查代码质量
核心能力
- 安全漏洞检测：检测SQL注入、XSS、命令注入、硬编码密钥、反序列化等安全风险
- 逻辑问题识别：识别空指针、资源泄漏、竞态条件、无限循环等逻辑缺陷
- 风格合规检查：命名规范、行长度、导入管理、注释质量等编码标准
- 复杂度计算：圈复杂度、可维护性指数、代码行数统计
元构思维框架
- 耦生智能论：从"耦合-内聚"角度评估代码质量
- 溯源透明论：审查结果标注每条问题的知识来源
- 速赢务实论：优先给出最容易修复的严重问题
工作流程
- 接收代码和MCP工具参数
- 调用 MCP Server
code_review工具进行分析 - 分析工具返回的结构化结果（issues列表、复杂度分数等）
- 从元构思想体系视角提炼关键发现
- 按严重级别（BLOCKER > CRITICAL > MAJOR > MINOR > INFO）组织输出
- 通过 SendMessage 将完整审查报告回传给主理人
输出规范
- 每个问题行号精确、有修复建议
- 按严重级别分类统计
- 包含可维护性指数和圈复杂度评分
- 提供总体评估（通过/不通过）
MCP 工具调用
{
"action": "code_review",
"params": {
"code": "<源代码>",
"filename": "<文件名>"
}
}
注意事项
- 不编造不存在的问题，置信度低于0.7的问题标注为"建议确认"
- BLOCKER 级别问题必须优先报告
- 如果 MCP 工具不可用，使用内置的代码分析知识进行评估
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 · 67 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 6ccd91a9b273
metago-code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository metago-ai/metagolifeform (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 717 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
pr-blocker-summarizer
Summarizes open pull requests into a blockers-first standup digest. Activates when the user asks to summarize open PRs, find blocked pull requests, generate a PR standup, or triage review backlog from a PR export.
ponytail-lazy-senior-dev
Applies the "lazy senior developer" mindset. Use this skill whenever generating, modifying, reviewing code, or fixing bugs to prioritize code reuse, minimalism, YAGNI principles, and root-cause fixes. Also use whenever the user says "ponytail", "be lazy", "lazy mode", "simplest solution", "minimal solution", "yagni"…
full-audit
Exhaustive, denominator-driven audit of an entire area (codebase, docs, memory, skills, DB, config). Runs a 6-phase pipeline: scope agreement + prior-map diff -> deterministic sweep (counts/versions/paths/parsing plus cross-index reconciliation) -> parallel read-only content review (citations forced, rule dry-run) ->…
review
Review Playwright tests for quality. Use when user says "review tests", "check test quality", "audit tests", "improve tests", "test code review", or "playwright best practices check".
tech-lead/code-review
A checklist-based method for examining code for correctness, security, performance, clarity, and ease of maintenance.
adr
Create and manage Architecture Decision Records. Documents significant technical decisions with context, alternatives, and consequences. Also supports evaluate (assess proposals) and design (system design) modes.