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 petekp/claude-code-setup --skill react-change-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/petekp/claude-code-setupWrote 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/petekp/claude-code-setup/react-change-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/petekp/claude-code-setup/react-change-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/petekp/claude-code-setup/react-change-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/petekp/claude-code-setup/react-change-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/petekp/claude-code-setup/react-change-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high System Prompt Leakage · line 144 Skill contains instructions that could directly expose system prompts, internal rules, or hidden instructions to users or external parties.Fix: Remove any instructions that reveal, print, or output system prompts or internal rules. System instructions should never be exposed to end users.
- medium MCP Rug Pull · line 64 npx commands without a version suffix (e.g. @1.0.0) create a rug-pull risk if the upstream server is compromised and publishes a malicious update.Fix: Pin the version: npx @scope/[email protected]
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 | $0.00359 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00144 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00072 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00036 |
Grade A, and why
react-change-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.
What it actually says
React change review
Infer the review target from the request and Git state. Use the specified PR or range when given; otherwise inspect local changes and the branch's intended base. Read the diff and affected callers. Follow shared behavior beyond the changed files where it could break a consumer.
Load supporting guidance only for a relevant risk:
react-doctor: running or interpreting React diagnostics. Prefer the repository's pinned command and reuse a current result for the same diff.react-useeffect: Effects, derived state, subscriptions, or cleanup.vercel-composition-patterns: component APIs or ownership changes.vercel-react-best-practices: suspected rendering, data-fetching, bundle, or server/client boundary issues.
Choose the canonical installed skill for each concern; do not load another vendor copy for the same guidance. Read individual rule references only when a suspected issue needs them.
Use review checks for a substantial diff or an unfamiliar failure mode. Run required repository checks and additional verification that can resolve a concrete concern. A current successful check need not be repeated unless the diff or relevant environment changes.
Report evidence-backed findings in fix order. Each finding needs a failing condition, user or consumer impact, and a location. Merge findings with the same cause. Separate unresolved suspicions and verification gaps from confirmed defects. A clean review is a valid result.
Reviewing authorizes inspection and reporting. Fix only changes already authorized and within the immediate concern. Report unrelated diagnostics or cleanup as follow-ups; they do not expand scope.
What ships with it
2 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 Changed · -127 lines · -61 tokens per session 1049573c348e
- 1mo ago First seen · 151 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A 848c57bd8216
react-change-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository petekp/claude-code-setup (48 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 359 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
frontend-code-review
Trigger when the user requests a review of frontend files (e.g., .tsx, .ts, .js). Support both pending-change reviews and focused file reviews while applying the checklist rules.
generic-react-code-reviewer
Review React/TypeScript code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md workflow compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, GPU-accelerated animations, WCAG AA accessibility, bundle size limits, and surgical simplicity. Use when completing features, before commits, or…
python-engineering-guidelines
General Python engineering standards for writing, reviewing, and refactoring maintainable code. Use when Codex works on Python code, especially in medium/large projects, runtime adapters, APIs, SDK integrations, async services, stateful systems, or refactors where readability, explicit typing, module boundaries, side…
code-review
Perform thorough code reviews with security, performance, and maintainability analysis. Use when user asks to review code, check for bugs, or audit a codebase.
swe-review
Review an SWE brief, research report, spec, delivery plan, execution state, implementation diff, branch, or pull request. Use for fresh-context, evidence-backed findings before the human chooses the next action.
requesting-code-review
Pre-commit review: security scan, quality gates, auto-fix.