code-review-checklist

code-review-checklist is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from phuonghx/aim-cli. It costs 67 tokens per session (751 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A checklist for reviewing code changes across correctness, security, speed, code quality, tests, and documentation. It also includes checks for code produced by AI systems, such as unsafe model output or prompt-injection risks.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it during pull-request reviews or code audits to check behavior, external input, injection risks, performance patterns, design quality, test coverage, documentation, and AI-specific risks.
Why use it?
It reduces the chance that a review overlooks edge cases, security weaknesses, slow queries, missing tests, or outdated documentation.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit Use it during pull-request reviews or code audits to check behavior, external input, injection risks, performance patterns, design quality, test coverage, documentation, and AI-specific risks.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/code-review-checklist
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 phuonghx/aim-cli --skill code-review-checklist
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/phuonghx/aim-cli

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.

agentmods badge for code-review-checklist

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/code-review-checklist/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/code-review-checklist)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/code-review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/code-review-checklist/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for code-review-checklist

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/code-review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/code-review-checklist.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 67 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 751 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. 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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00067 $0.00751
Opus 5.5 $0.00027 $0.00300
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00013 $0.00150
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00075

Measured 1mo ago against content hash fc2de6bb3262, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-review-checklist 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.

aim/templates/aim-agents/skills/code-review-checklist/SKILL.md · 100 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Review Checklist

A reviewer's running checklist. Walk the categories, flag what's missing, and tag findings by severity.

Fast Pass

Does it work?

  • Behaves as intended
  • Edge and boundary cases covered
  • Failures are caught and handled
  • No glaring logic errors

Is it safe?

  • All external input validated and cleaned
  • No injection paths (SQL, NoSQL, command, etc.)
  • No XSS or CSRF openings
  • No credentials or secrets baked into the source
  • AI-specific: guarded against prompt injection where relevant
  • AI-specific: model output cleaned before it reaches a sensitive sink

Is it fast enough?

  • No N+1 query pattern
  • No redundant loops or repeated work
  • Caching applied where it pays off
  • Effect on bundle/artifact size weighed

Is it clean?

  • Names communicate intent
  • No copy-pasted logic
  • Solid design boundaries respected
  • Abstraction pitched at the right level

Is it tested?

  • New paths have unit coverage
  • Edge cases exercised
  • Tests are readable and stable

Is it documented?

  • Tricky logic explained
  • Public interfaces described
  • README refreshed if behavior changed

Reviewing AI / LLM Code

Logic and fabrication risk

  • Reasoning path: does the logic hold up when traced end to end?
  • Failure states: are empty results, timeouts, and partial responses handled?
  • Outside world: are assumptions about the filesystem or network actually safe?

Prompt construction

// Weak — raw user text, no structure or guardrails
const reply = await model.complete(userText);

// Strong — explicit role, cleaned input, enforced output shape
const reply = await model.complete({
  role: "You parse invoices into JSON and nothing else.",
  input: clean(userText),
  schema: InvoiceSchema,
});

Smells Worth Flagging

// Unexplained literal
if (state === 2) { /* ... */ }
// Named instead
if (state === OrderState.SHIPPED) { /* ... */ }

// Arrow-shaped nesting
if (a) { if (b) { if (c) { /* ... */ } } }
// Flattened with guards
if (!a) return;
if (!b) return;
if (!c) return;
// ...real work

// One enormous function -> several focused ones
// Escape-hatch typing -> precise types
const payload: any = fetchIt();      // avoid
const payload: Invoice = fetchIt();  // prefer

Read the full file on GitHub · 100 lines

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 100 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A fc2de6bb3262

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository phuonghx/aim-cli (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 751 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

auto-review

Use this skill to configure and understand the built-in auto-review plugin (wstack-auto-review) that fires automated code review subagents on every code change during a session. Triggers: user says "auto review", "otomatik review", "auto code review", "her değişiklikte review", "/auto-review".

WrongStack/WrongStack · 67 tokens

codex-adversarial-review

Use this skill to conduct aggressive, adversarial code reviews on git changes, branches, or PRs to detect critical edge cases, race conditions, security holes, and data loss risks. Triggers: user mentions "adversarial review", "break the code", "find vulnerabilities", "security audit PR", "race condition check", "ship…

WrongStack/WrongStack · 83 tokens

code-review

Use this skill when asked to review code changes — a pull request, a branch, a commit range, or the current diff — for correctness, security, and maintainability before they merge. Triggers: user says "review", "code review", "review this PR", "review my changes", "look over the diff", "is this ready to merge", "PR…

WrongStack/WrongStack · 86 tokens

chimera

Use this skill for post-session code quality review of files added or modified during a WrongStack session. It runs automatically when a session ends, and on demand. Trigger on the explicit vocabulary — "review", "code review", "quality check", "post-session review", "chimeric review", "chimera" — and on the task…

WrongStack/WrongStack · 182 tokens

code-quality

Find and remove unused code, ghost dependencies, unnecessary coupling and bundle waste with source-confirmed reachability. Use when cleaning exports or packages, reviewing Knip output or reducing dead code; use security-scanner for security findings and preserve public/dynamic entrypoints.

WrongStack/WrongStack · 55 tokens

verify

Answer "is this shippable / done?" with evidence before a commit or PR — fires on "verify", "is this done", "ready to ship?", pre-commit or pre-PR. Part of the Agentsmith harness; runs the project's verify phases and never claims "passing" without showing the output (R5).

PromptPartner/agentsmith · 69 tokens