Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server. 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/omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server/main/.github/skills/code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-serverWrote 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/omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server/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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00051 | $0.00754 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00302 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00151 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00075 |
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 1mo 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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Terragrunt MCP Server Code Review
Review changes for concrete defects, behavioral regressions, security risks, contract drift, and missing tests. Findings are the primary output; implementation summaries are secondary.
Procedure
- Establish the review target and comparison base. For a pull request, read its description, changed files, review threads, and status checks.
- Check the worktree before running commands. Never include unrelated local changes in the review target.
- Read the smallest owning code path for each changed behavior, plus its nearest tests and call sites.
- Verify suspected defects with a focused test, type check, executable reproduction, or authoritative upstream source when practical.
- Report only actionable findings caused or exposed by the reviewed change. Separate pre-existing problems from regressions.
- If no findings remain, say so explicitly and identify residual test gaps or unverified risks.
Repository Review Checklist
- Preserve ES module
.jsextensions in TypeScript imports. - Keep MCP tool names, schemas, mode configuration, handler routing, and manager dependencies consistent.
- Ensure unexpected failures become valid MCP error responses at request boundaries; allow intentional initialization failures for invalid configuration.
- Check all five server modes when tools or dependencies change:
FULL,CORE,CONFIG,GUIDANCE, andOBSERVABILITY. - Verify template behavior at the actual
TemplatesManagerconstruction site; loader priority alone does not prove a loader is active. - Treat static Terragrunt CLI, HCL, function, schema, error, and guidance data as drift-prone. Compare claims with current authoritative Terragrunt sources.
- Review file-writing changes for path validation, allowed-directory enforcement, overwrite behavior, backups, and parent-directory handling.
- Require focused tests for narrow changes and broader validation for shared tool schemas, mode wiring, or user-facing workflows.
- Build before tests that execute
dist/; TypeScript-native unit tests do not require a prior build. - Do not approve automatic backend schema updates without human review of additions, removals, and deprecations.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 69 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A fe7d83f16fe7
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository omattsson/terragrunt-mcp-server (7 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 754 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
repo-audit
Audit a repository or prepare it for an open-source release. Audit mode reports whether the README matches the code and whether stated rules are actually enforced; launch mode walks a repo to release-ready with opt-in checklist packs and README templates. Use when asked to "audit this repo," "is this repo ready to go…
skill-audit
Audit codebases for quality, consistency, and broken patterns — use for pre-release or tech debt review.
skill-review-response
Use when a reviewer, CI bot, or another AI leaves feedback to address.
nightly-audit-engineer-ops
A workflow for reviewing code for reproducible quality problems and recording the evidence behind each finding. It follows data through inputs, permissions, storage, asynchronous work, and recovery, then suggests the smallest authorized fix.
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
github-review-pr
Review GitHub pull requests with detailed, multi-perspective code analysis using parallel subagents. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review a PR, asks for code review on a pull request, mentions "review PR", "check this PR", "look at pull request", or references a PR number or GitHub PR URL. Do NOT use for…