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 priyanshuchawda/codeaudit --skill enterprise-code-qualitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/priyanshuchawda/codeauditWrote 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/priyanshuchawda/codeaudit/enterprise-code-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/priyanshuchawda/codeaudit/enterprise-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/priyanshuchawda/codeaudit/enterprise-code-quality/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/priyanshuchawda/codeaudit/enterprise-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/priyanshuchawda/codeaudit/enterprise-code-quality.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00211 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00084 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00042 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00021 |
Grade A, and why
enterprise-code-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 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
Enterprise Code Quality
Standards
- Prefer small focused files with one clear responsibility.
- Use typed contracts and schema validation at external boundaries.
- Prefer clear names and simple control flow over clever abstractions.
- Avoid god files, vague helpers, dead code, and duplicated logic.
- Keep error handling explicit and useful without leaking secrets.
- Refactor only with tests before or alongside the change.
Review Checklist
- File size and responsibility boundaries.
- API, CLI, config, and database input validation.
- Test coverage for changed behavior.
- Data flow across server/client or trust boundaries.
- Duplicated logic that can be safely consolidated.
- Overengineering that hides simple domain logic.
Output Style
Findings should include severity, file evidence, why it matters, and the smallest practical recommendation.
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 · 31 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A ce1bb471e59e
enterprise-code-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository priyanshuchawda/codeaudit (1 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 211 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
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
design-review
Five-dimension design audit (frontend UI/UX · server data-model & flow · endpoint spec · daemon-runtime/SDK & local-cache-first · built-in skill/agent-role), executed by a NON-implementing agent. Every dimension gets a verdict; N/A only with a stated reason. A dimension the design silently skipped must be surfaced as…
codebase-design
Design maintainable module interfaces, review scoped code changes, and simplify implementations with behavioral verification. Use for code review, cleanup, testability, and module design work.
pr-blocker-summarizer
Summarizes open pull requests into a blockers-first standup digest. Activates when the user asks to summarize open PRs, find blocked pull requests, generate a PR standup, or triage review backlog from a PR export.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
ijfw-cross-audit
Generate a cross-platform multi-model audit (Trident) on a diff, brief, or artifact. Trigger: 'cross audit', 'Trident', 'second opinion', 'check with other models', 'check with other AIs', 'cross-check this', 'get another perspective', /cross-audit.