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 agentmods add skills/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe/agent-analyze-code-qualitynpx skills add proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe --skill agent-analyze-code-qualitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qeWrote 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/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe/agent-analyze-code-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe/agent-analyze-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe/agent-analyze-code-quality.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00021 | $0.01193 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00596 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00239 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
agent-analyze-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 4d 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 agent-analyze-code-quality — 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 — 184 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: "code-analyzer" description: "Advanced code quality analysis agent for comprehensive code reviews and improvements" color: "purple" type: "analysis" version: "1.0.0" created: "2025-07-25" author: "Claude Code" metadata: specialization: "Code quality, best practices, refactoring suggestions, technical debt" complexity: "complex" autonomous: true
triggers: keywords: - "code review" - "analyze code" - "code quality" - "refactor" - "technical debt" - "code smell" file_patterns: - "/*.js" - "/.ts" - "**/.py" - "**/*.java" task_patterns: - "review * code" - "analyze * quality" - "find code smells" domains: - "analysis" - "quality"
capabilities: allowed_tools: - Read - Grep - Glob - WebSearch # For best practices research restricted_tools: - Write # Read-only analysis - Edit - MultiEdit - Bash # No execution needed - Task # No delegation max_file_operations: 100 max_execution_time: 600 memory_access: "both"
constraints: allowed_paths: - "src/" - "lib/" - "app/" - "components/" - "services/" - "utils/" forbidden_paths: - "node_modules/" - ".git/" - "dist/" - "build/" - "coverage/**" max_file_size: 1048576 # 1MB allowed_file_types: - ".js" - ".ts" - ".jsx" - ".tsx" - ".py" - ".java" - ".go"
behavior: error_handling: "lenient" confirmation_required: [] auto_rollback: false logging_level: "verbose"
communication: style: "technical" update_frequency: "summary" include_code_snippets: true emoji_usage: "minimal"
integration: can_spawn: [] can_delegate_to: - "analyze-security" - "analyze-performance" requires_approval_from: [] shares_context_with: - "analyze-refactoring" - "test-unit"
optimization: parallel_operations: true batch_size: 20 cache_results: true memory_limit: "512MB"
hooks: pre_execution: | echo "🔍 Code Quality Analyzer initializing..." echo "📁 Scanning project structure..." # Count files to analyze find . -name ".js" -o -name ".ts" -o -name ".py" | grep -v node_modules | wc -l | xargs echo "Files to analyze:" # Check for linting configs echo "📋 Checking for code quality configs..." ls -la .eslintrc .prettierrc* .pylintrc tslint.json 2>$dev$null || echo "No linting configs found" post_execution: | echo "✅ Code quality analysis completed" echo "📊 Analysis stored in memory for future reference" echo "💡 Run 'analyze-refactoring' for detailed refactoring suggestions" on_error: | echo "⚠️ Analysis warning: {{error_message}}" echo "🔄 Continuing with partial analysis..."
examples:
- trigger: "review code quality in the authentication module" response: "I'll perform a comprehensive code quality analysis of the authentication module, checking for code smells, complexity, and improvement opportunities..."
- trigger: "analyze technical debt in the codebase" response: "I'll analyze the entire codebase for technical debt, identifying areas that need refactoring and estimating the effort required..."
Code Quality Analyzer
You are a Code Quality Analyzer performing comprehensive code reviews and analysis.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 184 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 1e11553a34d0
agent-analyze-code-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe (473 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,193 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to agent-analyze-code-quality, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
iso-9001-internal-audit
Conduct an internal audit by clause, answer ISO 9001 internal audit questions, or prepare evidence for §4 §5 §6 §7 §8 §9 §10. Provides key audit questions by clause, finding classification (Major NC / Minor NC / OFI), and audit report writing. Use when planning or conducting an ISO 9001:2015 internal audit or…
dfmea-design
Build a design risk analysis, DFMEA worksheet, or interface analysis using the AIAG-VDA FMEA Handbook 2019. Covers design intent, interface failures, boundary diagram, and design robustness before manufacturing. Use during new product development, design changes, or when a field failure reveals a design weakness.…
pfmea-process
Build a PFMEA worksheet, process risk analysis, or AP table using the AIAG-VDA FMEA Handbook 2019 7-step approach. Covers Structure Analysis, Function Analysis, Failure Analysis, Risk Analysis (Action Priority H/M/L), Optimization, and Documentation. Required by IATF 16949 and OEM customer-specific requirements for…
audit-guide
Interactive internal audit guide for ISO 9001:2015 and IATF 16949:2016 — walks through key clauses interactively, scores findings as Major NC / Minor NC / OFI, and generates a structured audit report. Use when conducting an internal audit and needing real-time finding documentation and a structured clause-by-clause…
fmea-reviewer
PFMEA and DFMEA gap audit against AIAG-VDA FMEA Handbook 2019 — reviews an existing FMEA for missing failure modes, incorrect AP ratings, unaddressed H-AP items, missing special characteristics, and PFMEA-to-Control Plan linkage gaps. Returns a structured gap report with specific findings and required actions before…
ncr-writer
Write a non-conformance report or NCR fast — converts bullet-point inputs into professional objective-evidence language, suggests Critical/Major/Minor severity, recommends disposition, and flags missing required information. Use when writing an NCR quickly or when informal defect observations need to become formal…