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 OneWave-AI/claude-skills --skill code-review-progit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OneWave-AI/claude-skillsWrote 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/onewave-ai/claude-skills/code-review-pro)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/onewave-ai/claude-skills/code-review-pro"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/onewave-ai/claude-skills/code-review-pro/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/onewave-ai/claude-skills/code-review-pro"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/onewave-ai/claude-skills/code-review-pro.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk fail
- 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 | $0.00039 | $0.01141 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00571 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00228 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00114 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-pro 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 10d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- code-review-pro — 100% identical, 18 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 174 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Pro
Deep code analysis covering security, performance, maintainability, and best practices.
When to Use This Skill
Activate when the user:
- Asks for a code review
- Wants security vulnerability scanning
- Needs performance analysis
- Asks to "review this code" or "audit this code"
- Mentions finding bugs or improvements
- Wants refactoring suggestions
- Requests best practice validation
Instructions
-
Security Analysis (Critical Priority)
- SQL injection vulnerabilities
- XSS (cross-site scripting) risks
- Authentication/authorization issues
- Secrets or credentials in code
- Unsafe deserialization
- Path traversal vulnerabilities
- CSRF protection
- Input validation gaps
- Insecure cryptography
- Dependency vulnerabilities
-
Performance Analysis
- N+1 query problems
- Inefficient algorithms (check Big O complexity)
- Memory leaks
- Unnecessary re-renders (React/Vue)
- Missing indexes (database queries)
- Blocking operations
- Resource cleanup (file handles, connections)
- Caching opportunities
- Excessive network calls
- Large bundle sizes
-
Code Quality & Maintainability
- Code duplication (DRY violations)
- Function/method length (should be <50 lines)
- Cyclomatic complexity
- Unclear naming
- Missing error handling
- Inconsistent style
- Missing documentation
- Hard-coded values that should be constants
- God classes/functions
- Tight coupling
-
Best Practices
- Language-specific idioms
- Framework conventions
- SOLID principles
- Design patterns usage
- Testing approach
- Logging and monitoring
- Accessibility (for UI code)
- Type safety
- Null/undefined handling
-
Bugs and Edge Cases
- Logic errors
- Off-by-one errors
- Race conditions
- Null pointer exceptions
- Unhandled edge cases
- Timezone issues
- Encoding problems
- Floating point precision
-
Provide Actionable Fixes
- Show specific code changes
- Explain why change is needed
- Include before/after examples
- Prioritize by severity
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 174 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A b96e3bb390f5
code-review-pro is a skill published in the GitHub repository OneWave-AI/claude-skills (288 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 1,141 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
refactor
Guides a refactor, cleanup, or restructure with the right decomposition. Use when the user asks to refactor, simplify, extract, or modernize code.
pre-publish-review
Nuclear-grade 12-agent pre-publish release gate. Runs /get-unpublished-changes to detect all changes since last npm release, spawns up to 10 ultrabrain agents for deep per-change analysis, invokes /review-work (orchestrator manual QA plus one gate reviewer) for holistic review, and 1 oracle for overall release…
work-with-pr
Full PR lifecycle in a fresh task-owned git worktree: implement via the ulw-loop skill with mandatory evidence-bound manual QA → reviewer-readable English PR → verification loop (CI + Cubic, where Cubic is skipped only when its quota is exhausted) → merge by default → worktree cleanup. Decomposes one task into the…
remove-ai-slops
Removes AI-generated code smells from branch changes or an explicit file list behind regression tests. Use when the user asks to clean up, deslop, or remove AI-slop patterns from recent changes.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
tech-debt-audit
Thorough, file-cited technical debt audit across 9 dimensions using AST-grep (tree-sitter), grep, LSP, and language-native tooling. Produces TECHDEBTAUDIT.md with severity, effort estimates, and prioritized fixes. Use when asked for codebase health check, tech debt audit, architecture review, code quality assessment…