A structured code-review guide for software design, Go code, Protocol Buffers, and API design. It examines how parts of a codebase are organized, connected, and tested, and can use static-analysis tools.

Use it for architecture reviews, Go reviews, protobuf reviews, API design reviews, SOLID checks, package-design reviews, and pull-request reviews of relevant files.

It helps uncover design problems, excessive coupling, hard-to-test code, and common Go or API issues before they become harder to change. It produces prioritized findings tied to the code being reviewed.

review-code — Skill for Claude Code and Codex by paultyng/skill-issue

Install

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.

Any agent

npx skills add paultyng/skill-issue --skill review-code

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/paultyng/skill-issue

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paultyng/skill-issue/review-code/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/paultyng/skill-issue/review-code)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/paultyng/skill-issue/review-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paultyng/skill-issue/review-code/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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/paultyng/skill-issue/review-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paultyng/skill-issue/review-code.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 99 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 5,273 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan B 1 finding. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.

Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.

Token cost

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	$0.00099	$0.05273
Opus 5.5	$0.00040	$0.02109
Sonnet 5.5	$0.00020	$0.01055
Haiku 4.5	$0.00010	$0.00527

Measured 4d ago against content hash 7f234ee7d408, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade B, and why

review-code scanned grade B 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 4d 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.

Reads agent configuration directoriesmediumAgent snooping

.claude/, .codex/, .gemini/ hold keys, settings and other credentials a mod has no legitimate need for.

- Findings must cite probed evidence (`path:line`, grep output, command result), not pattern-matched suspicion. Per `~/.claude/rules/probe-not-assume.md`.

skills/review-code/SKILL.md · 251 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 251 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Review

Structured code review covering architecture, Go best practices, and protobuf/API design. Produces actionable, prioritized findings with code-level references.

Workflow

1. Scope and explore

Confirm scope with the user: full codebase, specific packages/directories, changed files only (PR or branch diff), or specific concern.
Resolve scope to a file/package list. Based on what the user requested:
- Changed files (PR or branch): Run git diff --name-only --diff-filter=d <base>...HEAD to get changed files (default <base> is main). If the user references a PR number, use gh pr diff <number> --name-only instead. Filter to relevant file types (.go, .proto). Derive affected Go packages from the file paths (unique parent directories containing .go files).
- Explicit paths/packages: The user may specify directories (e.g. internal/auth/), Go package patterns (e.g. ./internal/auth/...), or individual files. When given a directory or package pattern, include all files under it. Derive Go package paths for static analysis tool invocations.
- Full codebase: No filtering. Explore everything (default).
Pass the resolved scope (file list and derived package paths) to all exploration and investigation subagents so findings stay scoped to those files. Reading is not scoped: follow callees, callers, and third-party source wherever a finding depends on their behavior. Report bugs in code the scope touches or calls even when they predate the diff, prefixed pre-existing:. Static analysis tools receive package paths; manual review subagents receive the file list.
Explore the scoped code using parallel subagents (subagent_type="explore"). Read all relevant source files, paying attention to package structure, type definitions, interfaces, import graphs, .go files, .proto files, and test files.
Classify the scope for change-aware subagents:
- has_changes: true when scope is "changed files (PR or branch)", or when scope is "explicit paths" and those paths have a diff against the base ref (run git diff --name-only --diff-filter=d <base>...HEAD -- <paths> to check; default base is main). False for full-codebase reviews with no diff baseline. When true, derive the changed file list (intersection of scoped files and files with diffs) and carry the base ref forward for subagents that need them.
Determine which subagents are applicable:
- Architecture and Design: applicable if code files (.go, .rs, .ts, .tsx, .js, .jsx, .swift, .kt, .kts, .py, .rb) exist in scope
- Go Best Practices: applicable if .go files exist in scope
- Protobuf and API Design: applicable if .proto files exist in scope
- Go Static Analysis: applicable if .go files exist in scope
- Protobuf Linting: applicable if .proto files exist in scope
- Regression History: applicable if code files exist in scope and has_changes is true
- Conformance Check: applicable if code files exist in scope (lightweight mode by default; full mode when conformance_mode is full)
- Dependency Evaluation: applicable if a dependency manifest (go.mod, package.json, requirements.txt, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, Gemfile, mix.exs, composer.json) is in scope and has_changes is true

Read the full file on GitHub · 251 lines

Files

What ships with it

3 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.

Changes

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.

4d ago Changed · +24 tokens per session 7f234ee7d408
1mo ago First seen · 251 lines · 75 tokens per session scan B 7ee7540588f7

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository paultyng/skill-issue (8 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 99 tokens to every session and 5,273 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (reads agent configuration directories). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.

Backend and APIs Claude Code Code review agent-skills ai-tools cursor dotfiles

api-design-reviewer

Use when reviewing API designs for consistency, usability, versioning, error semantics, security, backward compatibility, and developer experience before implementation or release.

seaworld008/Commonly-used-high-value-skills · 34 tokens

python-services

Python patterns for CLI tools, async parallelism, and backend services. Use when building CLI apps, async/parallel Python, FastAPI services, background jobs, or configuring Python project tooling (uv, ruff, ty).

iliaal/whetstone · 48 tokens

nodejs-backend

Node.js backend patterns: framework selection, layered architecture, TypeScript, validation, error handling, security, production deployment. Use when building REST APIs, Express/Fastify servers, microservices, or server-side TypeScript.

iliaal/whetstone · 50 tokens

meta-reviewing-api-reviewing

Backend code review — injection and SSRF, boundary validation, object-level authorization, mass assignment and data exposure, error leakage, N+1 and unbounded queries. Use when a diff touches API routes or handlers, database access, auth middleware, or server code that reads files, starts processes or fetches URLs.

agents-inc/skills · 70 tokens

deep-review

Evidence-based deep code review rubric — severity + confidence findings across maintainability, correctness, security, performance, and testing. Push for ambitious structural simplification (code judo), not just local cleanup. Escalate hands-on triage to the code-reviewer agent.

ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit · 57 tokens

gh-address-comments

Triage and address open GitHub PR review and conversation comments using the gh CLI. Use when the user wants to "address PR comments", "resolve review threads", or "respond to reviewers" on the current branch's pull request.

ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit · 51 tokens

review-code