requesting-code-review

requesting-code-review is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from moltis-org/moltis. It costs 46 tokens per session (2,104 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of requesting-code-review, MIT.

A pre-commit verification workflow that checks code changes with security scans, quality gates, and an independent review.

In plain words
What is it for?
It helps verify feature work and bug fixes, review diffs, apply fixes, and prepare changes for commits, pushes, or pull requests.
Why use it?
It catches defects and security issues before changes are committed, pushed, or opened as a pull request, while reducing the chance of reviewing only your own assumptions.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Which agent this was written for is unclear — built for hermes-agent. Also seen: mentions subagents; built for hermes-agent.

Good fit It helps verify feature work and bug fixes, review diffs, apply fixes, and prepare changes for commits, pushes, or pull requests.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/moltis-org/moltis/requesting-code-review
About the project

Moltis is a persistent personal agent server written in Rust that runs on hardware controlled by its user. It provides an AI agent with sandboxed command execution, model-provider connections, memory, voice, scheduling, messaging integrations, browser automation, and MCP tools. Its catalogue add-ons extend the agent’s workflows and available tools.

moltis-org/moltis · 2,851 stars · on GitHub · moltis.org

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 moltis-org/moltis --skill requesting-code-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/moltis-org/moltis

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 requesting-code-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/moltis-org/moltis/requesting-code-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/moltis-org/moltis/requesting-code-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/moltis-org/moltis/requesting-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/moltis-org/moltis/requesting-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for requesting-code-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/moltis-org/moltis/requesting-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/moltis-org/moltis/requesting-code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 46 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,104 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 1 finding. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin 80% copy Near-identical to another mod 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 $0.00046 $0.02104
Opus 5 $0.00023 $0.01052
Sonnet 5 $0.00009 $0.00421
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00210

Measured 7d ago against content hash 223dfc1311a9, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

requesting-code-review scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 7d 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.

Runs shell commandslowCapability

Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.

os.system(f"ls {user_input}")
Origin

This is a copy

80% identical to requesting-code-review — 23 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.

crates/skills/src/assets/software-development/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md · 280 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 280 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Pre-Commit Code Verification

Automated verification pipeline before code lands. Static scans, baseline-aware quality gates, an independent reviewer subagent, and an auto-fix loop.

Core principle: No agent should verify its own work. Fresh context finds what you miss.

When to Use

  • After implementing a feature or bug fix, before git commit or git push
  • When user says "commit", "push", "ship", "done", "verify", or "review before merge"
  • After completing a task with 2+ file edits in a git repo
  • After each task in subagent-driven-development (the two-stage review)

Skip for: documentation-only changes, pure config tweaks, or when user says "skip verification".

This skill vs github-code-review: This skill verifies YOUR changes before committing. github-code-review reviews OTHER people's PRs on GitHub with inline comments.

Step 1 — Get the diff

git diff --cached

If empty, try git diff then git diff HEAD~1 HEAD.

If git diff --cached is empty but git diff shows changes, tell the user to git add <files> first. If still empty, run git status — nothing to verify.

If the diff exceeds 15,000 characters, split by file:

git diff --name-only
git diff HEAD -- specific_file.py

Step 2 — Static security scan

Scan added lines only. Any match is a security concern fed into Step 5.

# Hardcoded secrets
git diff --cached | grep "^+" | grep -iE "(api_key|secret|password|token|passwd)\s*=\s*['\"][^'\"]{6,}['\"]"

# Shell injection
git diff --cached | grep "^+" | grep -E "os\.system\(|subprocess.*shell=True"

# Dangerous eval/exec
git diff --cached | grep "^+" | grep -E "\beval\(|\bexec\("

# Unsafe deserialization
git diff --cached | grep "^+" | grep -E "pickle\.loads?\("

# SQL injection (string formatting in queries)
git diff --cached | grep "^+" | grep -E "execute\(f\"|\.format\(.*SELECT|\.format\(.*INSERT"

Step 3 — Baseline tests and linting

Detect the project language and run the appropriate tools. Capture the failure count BEFORE your changes as baseline_failures (stash changes, run, pop). Only NEW failures introduced by your changes block the commit.

Read the full file on GitHub · 280 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. 7d ago First seen · 280 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 223dfc1311a9

Subscribe to this mod's changes

requesting-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository moltis-org/moltis (2,851 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 2,104 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (runs shell commands). It is 80% identical to requesting-code-review, differing in 23 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

openclaw-github-dedupe

Investigate a cluster of GitHub issues and PRs, determine canonical candidates, post duplicate/related status, preserve contributor credit, and execute cleanup actions. Supports autonomous mode for provided-link-only closeout, merge/fix follow-through, changelog, and post-merge issue/PR cleanup.

vincentkoc/dotskills · 68 tokens

openclaw-pr-batch-sweep

Select, review, repair, validate, and land batches of up to 20 low-risk OpenClaw contributor pull requests using Vincent's maintainer preferences and bounded sub-agent lanes. Use for "next 20", broad contributor PR sweeps, merge-candidate mining, or continued PR-batch work where drafts, maintainer work, trivial…

vincentkoc/dotskills · 95 tokens

docs-audit

Audit one section of the docs content against the code, and report what is wrong, stale, fragile, off-voice, or missing.

willdady/platypus · 32 tokens

semantic-slicing

Build local semantic review slices by combining clawpatch feature maps, deepsec threat candidates, visual review maps, and optional gitcrawl/discrawl evidence for repos such as openclaw/openclaw.

vincentkoc/dotskills · 43 tokens

technical-deslop

Remove AI-style noise from staged and branch diffs while preserving behavior and repository style.

vincentkoc/dotskills · 21 tokens

go-code-review

Use when reviewing Go code or checking code against community style standards. Also use proactively before submitting a Go PR or when reviewing any Go code changes, even if the user doesn't explicitly request a style review. Does not cover language-specific syntax — delegates to specialized skills.

cxuu/golang-skills · 56 tokens