code-review-and-quality

code-review-and-quality is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from Plazmodium/odin-workflow. It costs 23 tokens per session (321 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A code-review guide for assessing a change before it is merged into a shared codebase. It checks correctness, security, maintainability, tests, and whether the change is easy to review.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review diffs and pre-merge changes, report findings by severity, and identify missing verification or changes that should be split.
Why use it?
It helps catch edge cases, data-loss risks, security problems, missing tests, and overly large or unrelated changes that passing tests may not reveal.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

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

Good fit Use it to review diffs and pre-merge changes, report findings by severity…

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/plazmodium/odin-workflow/code-review-and-quality
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 Plazmodium/odin-workflow --skill code-review-and-quality
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Plazmodium/odin-workflow

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-and-quality

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/plazmodium/odin-workflow/code-review-and-quality.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/plazmodium/odin-workflow/code-review-and-quality)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/plazmodium/odin-workflow/code-review-and-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/plazmodium/odin-workflow/code-review-and-quality.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 23 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 321 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 $0.00023 $0.00321
Opus 5 $0.00012 $0.00161
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00064
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00032

Measured 6d ago against content hash 8b8913652f4c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-06, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-review-and-quality 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 6d 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.

agents/skills/workflow/code-review-and-quality/SKILL.md · 44 lines

What it actually says

code-review-and-quality

When To Use

  • Reviewing a diff or pre-merge change.
  • Asked for a review.
  • A change is complete enough to evaluate.

Workflow

  1. Determine the intended behavior and changed files.
  2. Review for correctness and edge cases.
  3. Review for safety: security, data loss, concurrency, migrations, and trust boundaries.
  4. Review for maintainability: clarity, names, scope, complexity, and local conventions.
  5. Review tests and verification evidence.
  6. Review change size; recommend splitting large or unrelated diffs.
  7. Report findings first, ordered by severity with file/line references.
  8. Use severity labels: Critical, Major, Minor, Nit, Optional, FYI.

Anti-Rationalization

Excuse Rebuttal
"Tests pass, ship it." Passing tests are evidence, not a review.
"The diff is too large to inspect closely." Large diffs should be split, not rubber-stamped.
"This is only a nit." Label nits as nits so real blockers stay visible.

Verification

  • Findings cite concrete code locations.
  • No speculation is presented as fact.
  • Missing tests or verification gaps are explicit.

Exit Criteria

  • A human can decide whether the change is safe to merge.
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. 6d ago First seen · 44 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 8b8913652f4c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review-and-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository Plazmodium/odin-workflow (0 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 321 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-01.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

live-audit

Audit steam-games-mcp — build/test/lint gate, live MCP tool edge-case sweep (input validation, SteamID64/vanity/appid edge cases, key-gating), and source-level code review. Use when asked to test/audit the published or just-fixed steam-games-mcp package, hunt for bugs/edge cases, or repeat "the same kind of testing as…

Grinv/steam-games-mcp · 83 tokens

github-pr-sentinel

Monitor a GitHub pull request until it's merged, green, or blocked. Polls CI checks, review comments, and mergeability state continuously. Use this skill when the user asks to monitor a PR, watch CI, handle review comments, sentinel a PR, babysit a PR, or keep an eye on failures and feedback — even if they just say…

d-o-hub/github-template-ai-agents · 0 tokens

tool-description-check

Self-check a new or edited MCP tool description/field .describe() text before committing — verify every behavioral claim against live testing or source, check for contradictions with sibling tools, and score against Glama's Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS) rubric. Use whenever a tool description or schema field…

Grinv/steam-games-mcp · 76 tokens

coding-reference

Quick-reference coding standards and backend patterns for consistent development.

mattmre/EVOKORE-MCP-PUBLIC · 13 tokens

orch-panel

Invoke a Panel of Experts review on any artifact — code, architecture, plans, repos, or documentation.

mattmre/EVOKORE-MCP-PUBLIC · 23 tokens

orch-review

Trigger code review workflow with risk detection and reviewer routing.

mattmre/EVOKORE-MCP-PUBLIC · 13 tokens