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/mtvrkan/senior-dev-kit/code-reviewnpx skills add mtvrkan/senior-dev-kit --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mtvrkan/senior-dev-kitWhat 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 | $0.00035 | $0.00522 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00261 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00052 |
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 3d 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
Review for actionable risks only. Skip subjective style. Read changed files + directly imported deps only. Auto-fires after meaningful changes; also invocable directly via /code-review for a deliberate pre-merge pass. If the diff touches a guarded domain (auth/payment/DB/CI), raise effort and escalate per the last line.
Do not use for: a dedicated, exhaustive security audit (security-review) — items (5) and (7) below are an inline sanity check on the diff, not a substitute for one; dependency CVE checks (security-scan); pre-release gating (release-gate); or a deep performance investigation (performance-check) — item (10) below is a quick flag, not a profiling pass.
Review order: (1) correctness bugs — logic errors, off-by-one, wrong condition, unhandled null/undefined. (2) regressions — breaks behavior callers depend on? (3) breaking changes — endpoint removed/renamed, required field added → grep for callers. (4) missing validation — unvalidated input reaching DB or executing code. (5) auth gaps — unauthenticated access, missing ownership check, role bypass. (6) data loss — overwriting without backup, missing transaction, destructive op. (7) injection — SQL/NoSQL/XSS/command via unsanitized input. (8) race conditions — non-atomic check-then-act, missing lock. (9) missing tests — behavior changed with no test update. (10) performance — N+1, expensive loop, unnecessary full-table scan.
Severity: critical (ship blocker) | high (fix before merge) | medium | low — format: SEVERITY | file:line | issue | fix
Critical:[N] High:[N] Medium:[N] Low:[N]
BREAKING CHANGES: [N — list | none]
VERDICT: ship ✓ | fix critical first | needs work
ESCALATE: [security-guard | db-guard | none]
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 28 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 354e7b2fd0a6
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository mtvrkan/senior-dev-kit (5 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 522 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
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.
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.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
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…