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-code-review-swarmnpx skills add proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe --skill agent-code-review-swarmgit 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-code-review-swarm)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe/agent-code-review-swarm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe/agent-code-review-swarm.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 5.1 | $0.00022 | $0.03111 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.01555 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00622 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00311 |
Grade A, and why
agent-code-review-swarm 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 7d 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-code-review-swarm — 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 — 543 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: code-review-swarm description: Deploy specialized AI agents to perform comprehensive, intelligent code reviews that go beyond traditional static analysis tools: mcp__claude-flow__swarm_init, mcp__claude-flow__agent_spawn, mcp__claude-flow__task_orchestrate, Bash, Read, Write, TodoWrite color: blue type: development capabilities:
- Automated multi-agent code review
- Security vulnerability analysis
- Performance bottleneck detection
- Architecture pattern validation
- Style and convention enforcement priority: high hooks: pre: | echo "Starting code-review-swarm..." echo "Initializing multi-agent review system" gh auth status || (echo "GitHub CLI not authenticated" && exit 1) post: | echo "Completed code-review-swarm" echo "Review results posted to GitHub" echo "Quality gates evaluated"
Code Review Swarm - Automated Code Review with AI Agents
Overview
Deploy specialized AI agents to perform comprehensive, intelligent code reviews that go beyond traditional static analysis.
Core Features
1. Multi-Agent Review System
# Initialize code review swarm with gh CLI
# Get PR details
PR_DATA=$(gh pr view 123 --json files,additions,deletions,title,body)
PR_DIFF=$(gh pr diff 123)
# Initialize swarm with PR context
npx ruv-swarm github review-init \
--pr 123 \
--pr-data "$PR_DATA" \
--diff "$PR_DIFF" \
--agents "security,performance,style,architecture,accessibility" \
--depth comprehensive
# Post initial review status
gh pr comment 123 --body "🔍 Multi-agent code review initiated"
2. Specialized Review Agents
Security Agent
# Security-focused review with gh CLI
# Get changed files
CHANGED_FILES=$(gh pr view 123 --json files --jq '.files[].path')
# Run security review
SECURITY_RESULTS=$(npx ruv-swarm github review-security \
--pr 123 \
--files "$CHANGED_FILES" \
--check "owasp,cve,secrets,permissions" \
--suggest-fixes)
# Post security findings
if echo "$SECURITY_RESULTS" | grep -q "critical"; then
# Request changes for critical issues
gh pr review 123 --request-changes --body "$SECURITY_RESULTS"
# Add security label
gh pr edit 123 --add-label "security-review-required"
else
# Post as comment for non-critical issues
gh pr comment 123 --body "$SECURITY_RESULTS"
fi
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 543 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 1a64e852d904
agent-code-review-swarm is a skill published in the GitHub repository proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe (474 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 3,111 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-code-review-swarm, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
migration-review
Review database migration files when a change adds or modifies paths under migrations/. Use it before merge to collect forward, rollback, locking, and data-safety evidence.
github-review-pr
Review GitHub pull requests with detailed, multi-perspective code analysis using parallel subagents. Use this skill whenever the user wants to review a PR, asks for code review on a pull request, mentions "review PR", "check this PR", "look at pull request", or references a PR number or GitHub PR URL. Do NOT use for…
no-mistakes
Validate committed feature-branch changes through the no-mistakes pipeline: intent, rebase, review, test, docs, lint, push, PR, and CI. Use when the user asks to run no-mistakes, ship safely, validate before pushing, or gate a change before it reaches upstream.
fkteams
Skill "fkteams" from wsshow/feikong-teams, covering fkteams 命令行完整指南, 一、快速入门, 第一步:生成配置文件, 第二步:编辑配置,添加模型(必填) and 编辑 /.fkteams/config/config.toml,填写 apikey 和 model.
generic-fullstack-code-reviewer
Review full-stack code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, input validation, GPU-accelerated animations, and design system consistency. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing pull requests.
loom-code-review
Comprehensive code review covering correctness, maintainability, performance, security, and best practices.