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 mnthe/hardworker-marketplace --skill code-quality-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mnthe/hardworker-marketplaceWrote 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/mnthe/hardworker-marketplace/code-quality-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mnthe/hardworker-marketplace/code-quality-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mnthe/hardworker-marketplace/code-quality-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/mnthe/hardworker-marketplace/code-quality-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mnthe/hardworker-marketplace/code-quality-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 | $0.00038 | $0.02304 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.01152 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00461 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00230 |
Grade A, and why
code-quality-review 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 9d 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 — 377 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Quality Review
Systematic code quality assessment for ultrawork verification phase.
What This Skill Provides
Structured checklists for evaluating code quality across multiple dimensions:
- Logic and readability
- Error handling and resilience
- Code style and maintainability
- Performance and efficiency
When to Use This Skill
- During VERIFICATION phase after workers complete tasks
- When reviewing evidence before marking tasks as complete
- Before approving design decisions that impact code quality
- When auditing implementations for production readiness
Quality Dimensions
1. Logic and Readability
Checklist:
[ ] Functions have single, clear responsibilities
[ ] Functions are under 50 lines
[ ] Files are under 800 lines
[ ] Nesting depth is 4 levels or less
[ ] Control flow is straightforward (no convoluted conditionals)
[ ] Variable and function names are descriptive
[ ] No magic numbers (constants are named)
[ ] Complex logic has explanatory comments
[ ] Boolean conditions are readable (avoid double negatives)
[ ] Early returns reduce nesting
Red Flags:
- Functions doing multiple unrelated things
- Variable names like
x,tmp,data,thing - Magic numbers:
if (status === 42) - Deep nesting:
if { if { if { if { ... }}}} - Complex conditions:
if (!(!isValid && !isExpired))
Examples:
// ❌ Bad: Unclear logic, magic numbers
function process(x) {
if (x > 100 && x < 500) {
return x * 0.95;
}
return x;
}
// ✅ Good: Clear intent, named constants
const BULK_ORDER_MIN = 100;
const BULK_ORDER_MAX = 500;
const BULK_DISCOUNT_RATE = 0.95;
function applyBulkDiscount(orderTotal) {
const isBulkOrder = orderTotal >= BULK_ORDER_MIN && orderTotal <= BULK_ORDER_MAX;
return isBulkOrder ? orderTotal * BULK_DISCOUNT_RATE : orderTotal;
}
2. Error Handling
Checklist:
[ ] All async operations have error handling
[ ] try/catch blocks used for risky operations
[ ] Errors are logged with context
[ ] User-facing errors are sanitized
[ ] Error messages are actionable
[ ] No silent failures (empty catch blocks)
[ ] Edge cases are handled (null, undefined, empty arrays)
[ ] Input validation exists for external data
[ ] Database operations handle connection failures
[ ] API calls have timeout handling
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 377 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 5a874990fe41
code-quality-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository mnthe/hardworker-marketplace (4 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 2,304 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…