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 pnp/copilot-prompts --skill code-review-csharpgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pnp/copilot-promptsWrote 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/pnp/copilot-prompts/code-review-csharp)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pnp/copilot-prompts/code-review-csharp"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pnp/copilot-prompts/code-review-csharp/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/pnp/copilot-prompts/code-review-csharp"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pnp/copilot-prompts/code-review-csharp.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 | $0.00066 | $0.02575 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.01030 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00515 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00258 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-csharp 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 233 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review C# Code for Best Practices
Perform a structured code review of C# source code. Identify issues related to naming conventions, performance, security, readability, and .NET best practices. Produce a prioritized report with actionable suggestions.
Gather Context
Before reviewing, determine:
- Code to review — the C# file, class, or snippet. If the user points to a file, read it. If they paste code, use it directly.
- Review focus — what to prioritize:
all(default) — full review across all categoriesnaming— naming conventions onlyperformance— performance and memory onlysecurity— security vulnerabilities onlyreadability— clarity, structure, and maintainability only
- Target framework — the .NET version. Default to .NET 8 if not specified. Auto-detect from
<TargetFramework>in.csprojif accessible. - Severity threshold —
all(default),warnings-and-above, orcritical-only.
If context is missing: Default to all focus, .NET 8, and all severities. Don't block the review to ask — just state your assumptions at the top of the report. Only ask if you genuinely have no code to review.
Report Format
# Code Review: {FileName or ClassName}
> Target: .NET {version} | Focus: {focus} | Reviewed: {date}
## Summary
{One-paragraph overview. Lead with the most important finding. State the total issue count by severity.}
## Issues
| # | Severity | Location | Issue | Why It Matters | Suggestion |
|---|----------|----------|-------|----------------|------------|
| 1 | Critical | `Class.Method:L12` | {issue} | {impact} | {fix} |
| 2 | Warning | `Class.Property` | {issue} | {impact} | {fix} |
| 3 | Info | `Class.Method:L25` | {issue} | {impact} | {fix} |
## What's Done Well
- {Positive pattern — be specific, not generic}
## Recommendations
1. **[Critical]** {Highest-impact change}
2. **[Warning]** {Next priority}
3. ...
Severity levels:
- Critical — bugs, security vulnerabilities, data loss risks. Fix immediately.
- Warning — convention violations, performance pitfalls, maintainability concerns. Fix soon.
- Info — style preferences, minor modernization opportunities. Fix when convenient.
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 First seen · 233 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A 642a8e6cb5db
code-review-csharp is a skill published in the GitHub repository pnp/copilot-prompts (894 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 2,575 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
dotnet-design-pattern-review
Review the C#/.NET code for design pattern implementation and suggest improvements.
code-review
Review pull requests for repository fit, meaningful value, trustworthy provenance, differentiation, and maintainability in awesome-copilot.
promptfoo-provider-setup
Connect Promptfoo to a model, live HTTP API, local Python/JavaScript provider, or app code. Use for request/auth mapping, response parsing, OpenAPI setup, and connection smoke tests. Use promptfoo-evals for broader eval coverage and promptfoo-redteam-setup for attack selection.
discount-review
Inspect the discount policy fixture with a repeatable review checklist and helper script.
analyzing-dotnet-performance
Scans .NET code for 50 performance anti-patterns across async, memory, strings, collections, LINQ, regex, serialization, and I/O with tiered severity classification. Use when analyzing .NET code for optimization opportunities, reviewing hot paths, or auditing allocation-heavy patterns.
code-review
Reviews code for bugs, security issues, and best practices.