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 OpenHands/extensions --skill learn-from-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OpenHands/extensionsWrote 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/openhands/extensions/learn-from-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/openhands/extensions/learn-from-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openhands/extensions/learn-from-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/openhands/extensions/learn-from-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/openhands/extensions/learn-from-code-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 | $0.00068 | $0.01380 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00552 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00276 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00138 |
Grade A, and why
learn-from-code-review scanned grade A with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- **`gh` CLI unavailable**: Fall back to direct GitHub API calls using `curl` with `$GITHUB_TOKEN`, or inform the user that `gh` needs to be installed. How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 187 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Learn from Code Review
Analyze code review comments from GitHub pull requests and distill them into reusable skills or repository guidelines that improve future code quality.
Overview
Code review feedback contains valuable institutional knowledge that often gets buried across hundreds of PRs. This skill extracts meaningful patterns from review comments and transforms them into:
- Repository-specific skills - Placed in
.openhands/skills/for domain-specific patterns - AGENTS.md guidelines - Overall repository conventions and best practices
Prerequisites
GITHUB_TOKENenvironment variable must be set- GitHub CLI (
gh) should be available
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Target Repository
Determine the repository to analyze:
# Get current repo info
gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner'
If not in a repository, ask the user which repository to analyze.
Step 2: Fetch Review Comments
Retrieve PR review comments from the repository:
# Fetch merged PRs from the last 30 days (adjustable)
gh pr list --repo {owner}/{repo} \
--state merged \
--limit 50 \
--json number,title,mergedAt
# For each PR, fetch review comments
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr_number}/comments \
--jq '.[] | {body: .body, path: .path, user: .user.login, created_at: .created_at}'
# Also fetch review-level comments (not tied to specific lines)
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr_number}/reviews \
--jq '.[] | select(.body != "") | {body: .body, user: .user.login, state: .state}'
Step 3: Filter and Categorize Comments
Apply noise filtering to keep only meaningful feedback:
Exclude:
- Bot comments (dependabot, copilot, github-actions, etc.)
- Low-signal responses ("LGTM", "+1", "looks good", "thanks", "nice")
- Comments shorter than 30 characters
- Auto-generated comments (CI status, coverage reports)
Categorize remaining comments by:
- Security concerns
- Performance patterns
- Code style/conventions
- Architecture/design patterns
- Error handling
- Testing requirements
- Documentation standards
What ships with it
5 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 187 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A 146a6ec99296
learn-from-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository OpenHands/extensions (167 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 1,380 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…