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 modimihir07/agentic-os --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/modimihir07/agentic-osWrote 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/modimihir07/agentic-os/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/modimihir07/agentic-os/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/modimihir07/agentic-os/code-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/modimihir07/agentic-os/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/modimihir07/agentic-os/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00012 | $0.00200 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00080 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00040 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00020 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 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
Code Review
Description
Reviews code changes against project standards, naming conventions, error handling patterns, and security best practices. Generates structured review report.
When to Use
- Before creating a PR
- When reviewing someone else's PR
- After implementing a feature
- During CI/CD pipeline
Process
- Read standards/ for project conventions
- Diff the changes
- Check against checklist:
- Naming conventions
- Error handling
- Security concerns
- Test coverage
- Documentation
- Report issues by severity (critical/major/minor)
- Critical issues block progress
Output
Structured review report with severity levels
Agent Assignment
- Primary: opencode
- Fallback: agy
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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 · 38 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 05da2288844c
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository modimihir07/agentic-os (203 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 200 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review
Review code for quality, maintainability, and correctness.
code-review
Reviews diffs by severity to produce actionable feedback.
code-review
A code-review and quality-analysis skill written in Chinese. It is intended to inspect code, find potential problems, and suggest improvements.
review-loop
Iterative code review — fix P1+P2 until clean, report P3 as an offer.
fresh-eyes-review
This skill should be used as a mandatory final sanity check before git commit, PR creation, or declaring work done. Triggers on "commit", "push", "PR", "pull request", "done", "finished", "complete", "ship", "deploy", "ready to merge". Catches security vulnerabilities, logic errors, and business rule bugs that slip…
code-review
Code review for issues, style consistency, best practices—use for full code evaluation; not for debugging specific errors or fixing individual style violations.