review-automation-patterns

review-automation-patterns is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills. It costs 48 tokens per session (2,582 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A guide to using automated code checks in continuous integration, the system that tests changes before they are merged or released.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to choose linters, type checkers, security scanners, and formatters; configure CI gates; and decide what automation should or should not review.
Why use it?
It helps teams automate objective checks while avoiding noisy tools, excessive false alarms, and reviews that rely on machines to judge intent.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit Use it to choose linters, type checkers, security scanners, and formatters; configure CI gates; and decide what automation should or should not review.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/review-automation-patterns
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills --skill review-automation-patterns
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-automation-patterns

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/review-automation-patterns/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/review-automation-patterns)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/review-automation-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/review-automation-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-automation-patterns

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/review-automation-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills/review-automation-patterns.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 48 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,582 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00048 $0.02582
Opus 5 $0.00024 $0.01291
Sonnet 5 $0.00010 $0.00516
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00258

Measured 12d ago against content hash 6de94cb638bb, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-automation-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 12d 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.

skills/review-automation-patterns/SKILL.md · 227 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 227 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Review Automation Patterns

Overview

Machines enforce rules with no exceptions (formatting, unused variables, known CVEs, type mismatches). Humans evaluate intent, architecture fitness, naming coherence, test quality, and logic correctness. The goal of review automation is to eliminate machine-checkable items from human review.

Pairs with review-efficiency-patterns and review-code-quality-process. Cross-reference security-patterns-code-review for security-specific automated checks.

Tool Selection by Language

Language Linter Type Checker Security Scanner Formatter
Go golangci-lint, go vet go build (compile-time) gosec gofmt, goimports
Python ruff (replaces flake8+isort+pyupgrade) mypy, pyright bandit, safety black, ruff format
TypeScript eslint + typescript-eslint tsc --noEmit semgrep, npm audit prettier
Rust clippy rust-analyzer, rustc cargo-audit, cargo-deny rustfmt
Java checkstyle, spotbugs, PMD javac (compile-time) snyk, OWASP dependency-check google-java-format, spotless
C++ clang-tidy, cppcheck clang (compile-time) — (use manual review) clang-format

Notes:

  • For Go, prefer golangci-lint as the aggregator — runs go vet, staticcheck, errcheck, and others in a single pass.
  • For Python, ruff has replaced the traditional flake8+isort+pyupgrade stack and is significantly faster. Run mypy separately.
  • For TypeScript, tsc --noEmit and eslint are complementary — tsc catches type errors, eslint catches code quality issues.
  • For Rust, clippy is authoritative and maintained by the Rust project. cargo-deny extends cargo-audit with license policy enforcement.
  • Java's spotbugs operates on bytecode and catches null pointer risks, resource leaks, and threading bugs that source-level linters miss.

Linter-to-Review Dimension Mapping

Review Dimension Tools That Cover It What Remains for Human Review
Security gosec, bandit, semgrep, cargo-audit, snyk, npm audit Business logic bypasses, authorization flaws, indirect injection, custom crypto misuse
Correctness tsc, mypy, go vet, rustc, javac, clippy Logic errors, wrong algorithm, off-by-one in business rules, incorrect state transitions
Performance clippy (some alloc patterns), spotbugs (some threading) Algorithmic complexity, N+1 queries, unnecessary serialization, cache invalidation
Style prettier, black, gofmt, rustfmt, clang-format, eslint Naming coherence across a feature, comment accuracy, API surface consistency
Duplication PMD (copy-paste detection) Semantic duplication, structural duplication across services
Test quality coverage thresholds (CI), eslint-plugin-jest Test intent, meaningful assertions, missing edge cases, test isolation
Architecture — (no tool covers this) Dependency direction, layer violations, coupling, modularity, fit with existing patterns
Dependency health cargo-deny, npm audit, snyk, safety Whether a newer version introduces breaking changes

Read the full file on GitHub · 227 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 12d ago First seen · 227 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 6de94cb638bb

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-automation-patterns is a skill published in the GitHub repository mickeyyaya/refactoring-skills (6 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 2,582 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

gemini-review

Google Gemini CLI code review with Gemini 2.5 Pro, 1M token context, CI/CD integration.

alinaqi/maggy · 26 tokens

squid-implement-night

Run the full agent-team pipeline end-to-end for one feature whose Tasks Plan is already approved by /squid-plan, handing the human a validated, ready-to-squash-merge PR. Trigger after /squid-plan.

iusztinpaul/squid · 52 tokens

pr-babysitter

Monitors or repairs an open GitHub PR: CI failures, conflicts, review threads, and merge readiness, reporting state changes. Use when asked to "watch this PR", "fix CI", "resolve conflicts", or "address review comments". For PR metadata use pr-creator; for npm release PRs use autoship.

mblode/agent-skills · 72 tokens

tech-debt-ci-review

Codex adapter for deep technical-debt and CI-stability audits. Use when asked to find test theater, flaky tests, missing or mis-scoped tests, brittle CI/toolchain behavior, structural debt blocking green PRs, or a remediation order for opencode-swarm.

ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm · 61 tokens

aster-review-ci

Run aster code reviews non-interactively in CI, GitHub Actions, or from another agent. Covers aster review --pr, --json, --stream, --comment, diff-from-stdin, token handling, and filtering findings. Use when wiring aster into a pipeline, posting PR comments, or parsing review output programmatically.

Zfinix/aster · 75 tokens

review

Review before merge. Stage-1 spec-compliance gate, then risk-selected Stage-2 review axes from the canonical set. analyst always runs, callers can pin extra always-on axes, and explicit deep review runs the full 16-axis set. Run after /test. Do NOT invoke code-qualities-assessment, doc-accuracy, golden-principles, or…

rjmurillo/ai-agents · 97 tokens