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 oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenixWrote 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/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/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/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/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 | $0.00034 | $0.02285 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.01143 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00457 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00229 |
Grade A, and why
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 6d 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 — 186 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Elixir/Phoenix Code
Review code by spawning parallel specialist agents. Find and explain issues — do NOT create tasks or fix anything.
Usage
/phx:review # Auto-detects task ID from branch/commits
/phx:review test # Review test files only
/phx:review security # Run security audit only
/phx:review oban # Review Oban workers only
/phx:review deploy # Validate deployment config
/phx:review iron-laws # Check Iron Law violations only
/phx:review ENA-8931 # Force Linear issue
/phx:review #42 # Force GitHub issue
/phx:review .claude/plans/auth/plan.md # Force plan / spec file
/phx:review --no-requirements # Skip requirements coverage check
/phx:review --codex # Add Codex CLI as cross-model reviewer
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS = Focus area, task ID, or path to plan/spec file.
When no requirements argument is passed, the skill auto-detects a task ID from
the branch and recent commits (see ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/requirements-detection.md).
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Changed Files and Prepare Directories
CRITICAL: Create output dirs BEFORE spawning agents — agents cannot create directories and writes will fail.
- Determine SLUG via Glob on
.claude/plans/*/(default:"review") - Run
mkdir -p ".claude/plans/${SLUG}/reviews" ".claude/plans/${SLUG}/summaries" .claude/reviews - Run
git diff --name-only HEAD~5andgit diff --name-only main - Save the diff base for pre-existing detection in Step 3b
Step 1b: Load Plan Context and Prior Reviews
- Read
.claude/plans/${SLUG}/scratchpad.mdfor planning decisions and rationale - Pass relevant decisions to agents as WHY-context (eliminates session archaeology)
- Check
.claude/plans/${SLUG}/reviews/for prior output; if present, include a consolidated summary as "PRIOR FINDINGS" with: "Focus on NEW issues. Mark still-present issues as PERSISTENT."
What ships with it
6 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.
- 6d ago First seen · 186 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 5c35fdf25e80
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix (542 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 2,285 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
elderly-ui-audit
A code review for making websites and mobile apps easier for older people to use, based on Chinese government accessibility guidelines.
fable-super-audit
Comprehensive, rubric-driven, whole-repository code audit that ends in a prioritized improvement plan with an executive health grade. Built to run in a premium, time-limited model session (Fable): it dispatches cheaper Opus/Sonnet subagents to explore the codebase and pre-build a project-tailored audit checklist, then…
cc-codex-review
A second-opinion workflow that sends uncertain questions and important technical decisions to Codex for review alongside Claude Code.
skill-pr-review
Comprehensive code review for pull requests using parallel multi-agent analysis. Audits CLAUDE.md compliance, checks for bugs, analyzes git history, reviews comments, and filters by confidence score. Use when reviewing a GitHub PR, mentions "code review", "review this PR", or "/code-review".
improve-codebase-architecture
Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.
skill-code-review
This skill should be used when the user mentions keywords related to code-review.