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 mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills --skill cpp-review-patternsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mickeyyaya/refactoring-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/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/cpp-review-patterns)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/cpp-review-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/cpp-review-patterns/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/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/cpp-review-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/cpp-review-patterns.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 | $0.00085 | $0.04703 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.01881 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00941 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00470 |
Grade A, and why
cpp-review-patterns 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 401 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
C++ Code Review Patterns
Overview
C++ combines the expressive power of high-level abstractions with direct control over hardware resources — and pays for it with a class of bugs that no compiler or runtime can fully prevent. A reviewer trained on Java, Python, or even Rust will miss the failure modes that are unique to C++: resource leaks that appear only under exceptions, undefined behavior that silently produces wrong results in optimized builds, template errors that require a compiler archaeology dig to interpret, and move semantics that invalidate objects in ways that look valid at a glance.
This guide covers six areas where C++ code most commonly fails in review or in production: memory management and RAII, undefined behavior, template pitfalls, const correctness, move semantics, and systemic anti-patterns. Each section includes before/after code examples and severity rules calibrated to real-world impact.
Load this skill when reviewing any C++ PR that touches resource acquisition, performance-critical hot paths, public APIs, or code that must be exception-safe. Cross-reference review-accuracy-calibration before posting: many C++ issues are compiler-detectable with the right flags (-Wall -Wextra -fsanitize=address,undefined), and findings backed by sanitizer evidence are C4; findings based on code reading alone are typically C3.
Quick Reference
| Review Dimension | Severity | Primary Red Flag |
|---|---|---|
| Raw new/delete without RAII | HIGH | new not paired with a smart pointer or RAII wrapper |
| Missing custom destructor | HIGH | Class owns a raw pointer but has no destructor, or has destructor but no copy/move ops |
| Shared ownership overuse | MEDIUM | shared_ptr where unique_ptr suffices; creates circular reference risk |
| Signed integer overflow | CRITICAL | Arithmetic on int with no overflow guard; UB in optimized builds |
| Use-after-free / dangling reference | CRITICAL | Pointer or reference to a destroyed object or invalidated container element |
| Uninitialized variable | HIGH | POD type declared without initializer; value is indeterminate |
| Strict aliasing violation | HIGH | reinterpret_cast between unrelated pointer types without memcpy |
| Template error message opacity | LOW–MEDIUM | Deep template instantiation with no static_assert guard |
Missing concept constraint |
MEDIUM | C++20 template accepting any type where only a subset is valid |
| Non-const method on logically const object | MEDIUM | Method mutates only cached state without mutable; blocks use in const contexts |
std::move on const object |
HIGH | std::move(const T) silently falls back to copy; intent unclear |
Missing noexcept on move constructor |
MEDIUM | Move constructor not noexcept; std::vector reallocation copies instead of moves |
| C-style cast | MEDIUM–HIGH | (T*)ptr hides the cast category; prefer static_cast, reinterpret_cast, or bit_cast |
| Exception in destructor | CRITICAL | Throwing from a destructor during stack unwinding calls std::terminate |
| Macro with side-effect argument | HIGH | Macro argument evaluated multiple times; use inline function or constexpr |
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 · 401 lines · 85 tokens per session scan A fd5e64ea529f
cpp-review-patterns is a skill published in the GitHub repository mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills (6 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 85 tokens to every session and 4,703 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
cpp-coding-standards
C++ coding standards based on the C++ Core Guidelines (isocpp.github.io). Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring C++ code to enforce modern, safe, and idiomatic practices.
frama-c-proofreader
Verify and proofread C code with ACSL using this repository's Frama-C MCP workflow, Frama-C WP static proof, EVA alarms, and optional E-ACSL runtime checks. Use when asked to run Frama-C, check ACSL contracts, explain WP goals, inspect EVA alarms, validate C annotations, or state what a C proof does and does not…
ia-c-systems
C patterns for systems code, libraries, and native extensions: module layout, function decomposition, status-enum errors, memory safety, undefined behavior, and performance measurement. Use when writing, reviewing, refactoring, or debugging C, working with malloc lifetimes, buffer overflows, sanitizers, or Valgrind…
code-reviewer
A code-review procedure for Python, JavaScript, and Go programs. It checks security, performance, maintainability, naming, error handling, and testing.
review-ocaml
Two-phase review of an OCaml project. Use when the user asks to review an OCaml codebase, audit its module interfaces, restructure or redocument .mli files, or hunt for redundancy, dead code and optimisation opportunities across implementations. Phase one reads only dune and .mli files to judge the public interfaces…
qt-cpp-review
Invoke when the user asks to review, check, audit, or look over Qt6 C++ code — or suggest before committing. Runs deterministic linting (60+ rules) then deep-analysis agents (scaled to the size of the change) covering model contracts, ownership, threading, API correctness, error handling, and performance. Reports only…