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 pranav8494/team-of-agents --skill kotlin-code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pranav8494/team-of-agentsWrote 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/pranav8494/team-of-agents/kotlin-code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pranav8494/team-of-agents/kotlin-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pranav8494/team-of-agents/kotlin-code-reviewer/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/pranav8494/team-of-agents/kotlin-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pranav8494/team-of-agents/kotlin-code-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00031 | $0.02176 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01088 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00435 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00218 |
Grade A, and why
kotlin-reviewer 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 12d 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 — 218 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Kotlin Code Reviewer Skill
Iron Law
Block any PR that violates architectural boundaries, skips tests, or introduces security issues.
Flag (not block) style deviations that don't affect correctness.
Before Taking Any Action
- Announce that you are beginning a code review and note the scope (file names, PR description if provided)
- Ask for context if not provided: what is this code doing, are there related PRs, are there known constraints?
- Present findings as a structured review, not a stream of consciousness
- Note explicitly any areas you could not fully assess (e.g. missing context, untestable logic without runtime data)
Task Approach
Use this table to determine what to produce for each task type:
| User asks for | What to produce |
|---|---|
| PR / diff review | Structured five-phase review (Architecture → Kotlin correctness → Testing → Observability → Security); all findings grouped by phase with severity labels; overall verdict at the end |
| Architecture boundary check | Phase 1 findings only; each violation identifies which layer the logic belongs in and where it was incorrectly placed |
| Kotlin idiom review | Phase 2 findings only; each anti-pattern flagged with the idiomatic replacement and a concrete before/after code snippet |
| Test adequacy review | Phase 3 findings only; untested paths identified, missing edge cases listed, and test quality issues (naming, mock DSL, async assertions) noted |
| Observability review | Phase 4 findings only; missing metrics or malformed log calls flagged with the expected convention |
| Security review | Phase 5 findings only; each finding labelled as a blocker with the specific risk and remediation step |
| Overall verdict only | One-paragraph summary: what the PR does well, what must change before merge, and the verdict label (Approve / Approve with minor comments / Request Changes / Block) |
Review Process
Phase 1, Architecture boundaries (block if violated) Phase 2, Kotlin correctness (block if violated) Phase 3, Testing adequacy (block if violated) Phase 4, Observability (flag if missing) Phase 5, Security (block if violated)
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 218 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 0d1366239c51
kotlin-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository pranav8494/team-of-agents (7 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 2,176 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
phx-review
Review changed Elixir/Phoenix code read-only. Check requirements, cite evidence, deduplicate findings, and return a severity-based verdict.
bootstrap-xcode-workspace
Create, adopt, extend, and align one Swift product workspace with app, extension, package, and service components under one permanent Xcode entrypoint.
build-kotlin-android
Implement Kotlin-first Android app or library changes, including activities, fragments, services, receivers, Compose UI, XML/AppCompat UI, AndroidX, lifecycle-aware coroutines, state, persistence touchpoints, resources, accessibility labels, navigation touchpoints, tests, lint, and validation while preserving repo…
ts-review
Review TypeScript code for quality, security, and correctness. Use this skill when the user asks for a code review, wants feedback on a PR or diff, or says "review this". Covers architecture, security, error handling, database patterns, type safety, and code quality. Produces categorized findings: critical issues…
explore-apple-swift-docs
Explore Apple and Swift documentation across Xcode MCP docs, Dash, source repositories, generated docs, and readable official web docs, including search, browse, source selection, local-docs fallback, and optional Dash install or generation follow-up. Use when Codex needs Apple or Swift docs help rather than Xcode…
format-swift-sources
Guide SwiftLint and SwiftFormat integration across CLI, Xcode build phases, Xcode source-editor workflows, Swift Package plugins, AppleScript, Git hooks, and GitHub Actions, including exporting SwiftFormat for Xcode settings into a checked-in project config file. Use this first when a later source-organization pass…