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/nytc69/review-loop/code-quality-loopnpx skills add NYTC69/review-loop --skill code-quality-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NYTC69/review-loopWhat 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 | $0.00040 | $0.05475 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.02738 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.01095 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00547 |
Grade A, and why
code-quality-loop 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 yesterday.
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 — 552 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Quality Loop
Automated code review cycle: review -> fix -> re-review until clean. Focuses on code-level quality (correctness, style, error handling, tests).
Overview
Pre-loop: language-specific agents -> fix (once per detected language)
Loop R1: code-reviewer + silent-failure-hunter + comment-analyzer + type-design-analyzer -> triage -> fix
Loop R2+: code-reviewer + silent-failure-hunter -> triage -> fix -> repeat
Finalize: reorganize (if applicable) -> code-simplifier agent -> build -> test consolidation -> pr-test-analyzer
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS: Optional flags and max round count.
- Max rounds:
/code-quality-loop 3— limit to 3 rounds (default: 5) - Skip reorganize:
/code-quality-loop --skip-reorganize— skip the Reorganize step in Finalize - Force reorganize:
/code-quality-loop --reorganize— always run Reorganize regardless of change size - Combined:
/code-quality-loop 3 --skip-reorganize
If neither --skip-reorganize nor --reorganize is specified, the Orchestrator decides automatically based on change scope (see Finalize Step 1).
Initialization
-
Scope: Always reviews
git diff(unstaged changes), consistent with all internal review tools. Rungit diff --name-only --diff-filter=dto identify changed files. If no changes found, abort with message "No changes to review." -
Language detection: Detect languages from changed files:
{ git diff --name-only --diff-filter=d HEAD; git ls-files --others --exclude-standard; } | grep '\.' | sed 's/.*\.\([^.]*\)$/\1/' | sort -uMap file extensions to language-specific agents:
.go->go-reviewer.rs->rust-reviewer.py->python-reviewer.ts,.tsx,.js,.jsx,.html,.vue,.svelte->frontend-security-reviewer
Record the set of applicable language agents as
language_agents. -
Load design context (optional): Look for a design document in the project (e.g.,
openspec/changes/*/design.md,docs/design.md, or similar). If multiple exist, use the most recently modified one. If found, read it. This is the fix boundary constraint -- applies to all fix actions throughout this command (loop fixes, simplify, etc.). Do not deviate from design intent unless a design-level defect is found (security vulnerability, race condition, obvious logic error). If no design document is found, skip this constraint -- all fixes are allowed.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 552 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 0e21cb370df7
code-quality-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository NYTC69/review-loop (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 5,475 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
codex-adversarial-review-lite
Codex Adversarial Review - Lite: user-invoked audit workflow for Claude Code users who want Codex CLI to independently review AI-generated code, plans, test expectations, and scope before fixes are applied. Cross-platform (Windows, macOS, Linux, WSL). Use only when the user explicitly invokes audit or selftest.
codex-handoff
Three-phase collaboration workflow between Claude Code (planner/decision-maker) and Codex CLI (implementer/reviewer) via the codex-plugin-cc plugin. Use whenever a coding task involves multiple files, new modules, cross-cutting refactors, business logic changes, or anything that warrants a written spec and a review…
brain-docs
Set up and maintain a "project brain" — a brain/ folder holding three living documents (decisions.md, flow.md, todo.md) that give a project persistent memory across chat sessions. Use this skill whenever the user wants a decision log, architecture/flow notes, project memory, living documentation, or notes that survive…
codex-handoff
Three-phase collaboration workflow between Claude Code (planner/decision-maker) and Codex CLI (implementer/reviewer) via the codex-plugin-cc plugin. Use whenever a coding task involves multiple files, new modules, cross-cutting refactors, business logic changes, or anything that warrants a written spec and a review…
moai-ref-ui-polish
UI polish and interface-completion reference: the small visual details — concentric border radius, optical alignment, shadow-vs-border, motion easing, typography smoothing, tabular numbers, icon stroke weight, hit areas — that separate polished interfaces from generic ones. Agent-extending skill that amplifies…
trellis-brainstorm
Guides collaborative requirements discovery before implementation. Creates task directory, seeds PRD, asks high-value questions one at a time, researches technical choices, and converges on MVP scope. Use when requirements are unclear, there are multiple valid approaches, or the user describes a new feature or complex…