Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to n24q02m/better-code-review-graph. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/main/.agents/skills/review-pr/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/n24q02m/better-code-review-graphWrote 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/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/review-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/review-pr/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/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n24q02m/better-code-review-graph/review-pr.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 | $0.00027 | $0.00577 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00289 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00115 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00058 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr 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 — 67 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review PR
Perform a comprehensive code review of a pull request or branch diff using the knowledge graph.
Token optimization: Before starting, call help(topic="graph") for the full actions reference. Never include full files unless explicitly asked.
Steps
-
Identify the changes for the PR:
- If a PR number or branch is provided, use
git diff main...<branch>to get changed files - Otherwise auto-detect from the current branch vs main/master
- If a PR number or branch is provided, use
-
Update the graph by calling
graph(action="build", base="main")to ensure the graph reflects the current state. -
Get the full review context by calling
review(base="main"):- This uses
main(or the specified base branch) as the diff base - Returns all changed files across all commits in the PR
- This uses
-
Analyze impact by calling
query(action="impact", base="main"):- Review the blast radius across the entire PR
- Identify high-risk areas (widely depended-upon code)
-
Deep-dive each changed file:
- Read the full source of files with significant changes
- Use
query(action="query", pattern="callers_of", target=<func>)for high-risk functions - Use
query(action="query", pattern="tests_for", target=<func>)to verify test coverage - Check for breaking changes in public APIs
-
Generate structured review output:
## PR Review: <title> ### Summary <1-3 sentence overview> ### Risk Assessment - **Overall risk**: Low / Medium / High - **Blast radius**: X files, Y functions impacted - **Test coverage**: N changed functions covered / M total ### File-by-File Review #### <file_path> - Changes: <description> - Impact: <who depends on this> - Issues: <bugs, style, concerns> ### Missing Tests - <function_name> in <file> - no test coverage found ### Recommendations 1. <actionable suggestion> 2. <actionable suggestion>
Tips
- For large PRs, focus on the highest-impact files first (most dependents)
- Use
query(action="search", search_query=<term>)to find related code the PR might have missed - Check if renamed/moved functions have updated all callers
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 · 67 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 389c26372540
review-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository n24q02m/better-code-review-graph (67 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 577 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-review
Reviews a GitHub pull request and posts inline comments plus one consolidated summary, adapting to any codebase by discovering the project's own test runner, requirement specs, and architecture conventions before running six specialized review agents in parallel. Stack-agnostic across language and framework; targets…
best-practices
Apply modern web development best practices for security, compatibility, and code quality. Use when asked to "apply best practices", "security audit", "modernize code", "code quality review", or "check for vulnerabilities". Do NOT use for accessibility (use web-accessibility), SEO (use seo), performance (use…
gh-address-comments
Address review and issue comments on the open GitHub PR for the current branch using gh CLI. Use when user says "address PR comments", "fix review feedback", "respond to PR review", or "handle PR comments". Verifies gh auth first and prompts to authenticate if not logged in. Do NOT use for creating PRs, CI debugging…
codeck
Route explicit requests from a host coding agent to one or more locally configured AI executors through Codeck, attach Markdown or other project files, moderate cross-model consultation, expose disagreements, and synthesize traceable results. Use when the user explicitly names Codeck or asks to consult, compare, or…
review-work
Post-implementation review orchestrator. Launches 5 parallel background sub-agents: Oracle (goal/constraint verification), Oracle (code quality), Oracle (security), unspecified-high (hands-on QA execution), unspecified-high (context mining from GitHub/git/Slack/Notion). All must pass for review to pass. MUST USE after…
code-review-excellence
Transform code reviews from gatekeeping to knowledge sharing through constructive feedback, systematic analysis, and collaborative improvement.