Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to priyanshuchawda/tracepilot-gemini-cli. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/priyanshuchawda/tracepilot-gemini-cli/main/.gemini/skills/review-duplication/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/priyanshuchawda/tracepilot-gemini-cliWrote 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/tracepilot-gemini-cli/review-duplication)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/priyanshuchawda/tracepilot-gemini-cli/review-duplication"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/priyanshuchawda/tracepilot-gemini-cli/review-duplication/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/tracepilot-gemini-cli/review-duplication"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/priyanshuchawda/tracepilot-gemini-cli/review-duplication.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 | $0.00037 | $0.01165 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00583 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00233 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
review-duplication 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 10d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to review-duplication — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Duplication
Overview
This skill provides a structured workflow for investigating a codebase during a code review to identify duplicated logic, reinvented utilities, and missed opportunities to reuse established patterns. By executing this workflow, you ensure that new code integrates seamlessly with the existing project architecture.
Workflow: Investigating for Duplication
When reviewing code, perform the following steps before finalizing your review:
1. Extract Core Logic
Analyze the new code to identify the core algorithms, utility functions, generic data structures, or UI components being introduced. Look beyond the specific business logic to see the underlying mechanics.
2. Hypothesize Existing Locations & Trace Dependencies
Think about where this type of code would live if it already existed in the project. Provide absolute paths from the repo root to disambiguate.
- Utilities:
packages/core/src/utils/,packages/cli/src/utils/ - UI Components:
packages/cli/src/ui/components/,packages/cli/src/ui/ - Services:
packages/core/src/services/,packages/cli/src/services/ - Configuration:
packages/core/src/config/,packages/cli/src/config/ - Core Logic: Call out
packages/core/if functionality does not appear React UI specific.
Trace Third-Party Dependencies: If the PR introduces a new import for a utility library (e.g., lodash.merge, date-fns), trace how and where the project currently uses that library. There is likely an existing wrapper or shared utility.
Check Package Files: Before flagging a custom implementation of a complex algorithm, check package.json to see if a standard library (like lodash or uuid) is already installed that provides this functionality.
3. Investigate the Codebase (Sub-Agent Delegation)
Delegate the heavy lifting of codebase investigation to specialized sub-agents. They are optimized to perform deep searches and semantic mapping without bloating your session history.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 70 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 79952fb123e4
review-duplication is a skill published in the GitHub repository priyanshuchawda/tracepilot-gemini-cli (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 1,165 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-duplication, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-review-and-quality
Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch.
code-graph-review
Use BEFORE a commit or change review, when you need to understand "what this N-file change will break": blast radius over the diff, affected execution paths, dead code, architectural hubs/bridges, weak spots, rename with preview. Do not use for code search — CRG is for structural diff analysis, not navigation.
fable-judge
Adversarial verification of finished work: re-runs the claimed verifications, diffs what changed, detects false "done" claims, delivers an evidence-based verdict (VERIFIED / VERIFIED WITH CAVEATS / REFUTED). Use after any agent or model claims work is complete — "/fable-judge", "judge this work", "verify what it did".…
requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements.
receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation.
spec-kitty-mission-review
Review a fully merged Spec Kitty mission post-merge (all WPs done/approved) to verify spec→code fidelity, FR coverage, drift, risks, and security. Triggers: "review the merged mission", "post-merge mission review", "verify the completed mission", "audit the mission implementation", "mission-level acceptance review"…