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 agentmods add skills/miniidealab/openlogos/code-reviewernpx skills add miniidealab/openlogos --skill code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/miniidealab/openlogosWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.02610 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01305 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00522 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00261 |
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 2d 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 — 210 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Skill: Code Reviewer
审查 AI 生成的代码，基于 OpenLogos 全链路规格（API YAML、时序图 EX 用例、DB DDL）进行系统性校验，确保代码与设计文档完全一致，覆盖所有异常路径，满足安全要求。
触发条件
- 用户要求审查代码或 Code Review
- 用户提到 "Phase 3 Step 4"、"代码审核"、"代码审查"
- AI 刚生成了一段代码，需要验证其质量
- 部署前的最终检查
- 编排测试失败后需要定位代码问题
前置依赖
logos/resources/api/中包含 API YAML 规格logos/resources/prd/3-technical-plan/2-scenario-implementation/中包含场景时序图（含 EX 用例）logos/resources/database/中包含 DB DDL- 待审查的代码已可读取
无 API 的项目（纯 CLI / 库）可省略 API 一致性检查，聚焦时序图覆盖和异常处理。
核心能力
- 校验代码实现与 API YAML 规格的一致性
- 检查异常处理是否覆盖所有 EX 用例
- 检查 DB 操作是否符合 DDL 设计
- 检查安全策略（认证、RLS、输入校验）
- 检查代码风格和最佳实践
- 输出结构化的审查报告
执行步骤
Step 1: 加载规格上下文
前置检查 — YAML 有效性（优先于一切）：
在加载 API 规格之前，先验证所有 logos/resources/api/*.yaml 文件是否为有效 YAML 且符合 OpenAPI 3.x 规范。如果任何文件解析失败（例如 description 字段中特殊字符未加引号），立即报告为 Critical 阻塞项——在 YAML 错误修复前不进行后续审查。
然后读取以下文件，建立代码审查的"参照基准"：
- API YAML（
logos/resources/api/*.yaml）：提取端点清单，记录每个端点的路径、方法、请求体 schema、响应 schema、状态码 - 场景时序图（
logos/resources/prd/3-technical-plan/2-scenario-implementation/）：提取所有 EX 异常用例编号和预期行为 - DB DDL（
logos/resources/database/）：提取表结构、字段类型、约束、索引 logos-project.yaml：读取tech_stack确认技术栈，external_dependencies确认外部依赖
汇总为审查检查清单：
审查范围：S01 相关代码
- API 端点：4 个（auth.yaml）
- EX 异常用例：7 个（EX-2.1 ~ EX-5.2）
- DB 表：2 张（users, profiles）
- 安全策略：RLS 2 条
Step 2: API 一致性审查
逐个端点对比代码实现与 API YAML 规格：
检查项：
| 检查项 | 说明 | 严重程度 |
|---|---|---|
| 路径匹配 | 代码中的路由路径是否与 YAML 中的 paths 完全一致 |
Critical |
| HTTP 方法 | GET/POST/PUT/DELETE 是否匹配 | Critical |
| 请求体字段 | 代码是否读取了 YAML 中 requestBody.schema 定义的所有 required 字段 |
Critical |
| 请求体校验 | 字段类型、format（email/uuid）、minLength 等约束是否在代码中有校验 | Warning |
| 响应字段 | 代码返回的 JSON 字段名和类型是否与 YAML 中 responses.schema 一致 |
Critical |
| 状态码 | 正常和异常情况下返回的 HTTP 状态码是否与 YAML 定义一致 | Critical |
| 错误响应格式 | 错误响应是否遵循 { code, message, details? } 统一格式 |
Warning |
| YAML 有效性 | logos/resources/api/*.yaml 所有文件是否为有效 YAML 且符合 OpenAPI 3.x 规范——description/summary 值中未加引号的特殊字符（:、→、#）是常见故障点 |
Critical |
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 210 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A f5015501ed38
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository miniidealab/openlogos (71 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,610 tokens. 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
agent-host-chat-contributions
Build and review cross-cutting agent-host chat behavior through lifecycle contributions. Use when adding turn lifecycle side effects, prompt or context injection, restored-history transformation, protocol-action observation, or when reviewing changes that add code to AgentSideEffects or AgentService.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.