Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to pubky/pubky-app. 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/pubky/pubky-app/dev/.agents/skills/pubky-code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pubky/pubky-appWrote 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/pubky/pubky-app/pubky-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pubky/pubky-app/pubky-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pubky/pubky-app/pubky-code-review/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/pubky/pubky-app/pubky-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pubky/pubky-app/pubky-code-review.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 | $0.00056 | $0.02689 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.01076 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00538 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00269 |
Grade A, and why
pubky-code-review 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 — 150 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Local Code Review
Review a change against the project's rules with three focused read-only reviewers, a deterministic callouts pass, and the project's own checks when they are available. Print one status line once the scope is known, then the report. Do not narrate the steps in between.
Step 1 — Determine the scope
Work out what to review without asking when the answer is already known:
| Signal | Scope |
|---|---|
| The request or the skill argument names a branch, a PR number, one or more paths, or says local/uncommitted | Use it |
Uncommitted changes exist (git status --porcelain is non-empty) and nothing was named |
Local uncommitted changes |
| Feature branch with a clean tree | Full branch diff against dev |
On dev or master with a clean tree |
Ask which branch or PR to review |
Ask only when the table gives no answer. Status line example: Reviewing branch diff against dev (12 files)…
Step 2 — Collect the diff
Write the diff to a temp file and keep the changed-file list. Reviewers read the file; the diff is never pasted into their prompts. Noise files are excluded from every scope. Set SCOPE to local, branch, pr or paths from Step 1 and run only that branch of the case.
git fetch -q origin dev
EXCLUDE=(':!package-lock.json' ':!**/__screenshots__/**' ':!public/sw.js' ':!src/libs/lucide/lucideIcons.aliases.ts' ':!src/libs/lucide/lucideIcons.nodes.ts' ':!src/libs/lucide/lucideIcons.tags.ts')
OUT="${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/pubky-review-$(date +%s).diff"
case "$SCOPE" in
local) # tracked changes (staged + unstaged) plus untracked files
git diff HEAD -- . "${EXCLUDE[@]}" > "$OUT"
git ls-files --others --exclude-standard -- . "${EXCLUDE[@]}" | while read -r f; do git diff --no-index -- /dev/null "$f" >> "$OUT" || true; done # --no-index exits 1 on a diff
git status --porcelain -- . "${EXCLUDE[@]}" # changed-file list (?? = untracked)
;;
branch)
RANGE="origin/dev...HEAD"
git diff "$RANGE" -- . "${EXCLUDE[@]}" > "$OUT"
git diff --name-status "$RANGE" -- . "${EXCLUDE[@]}" # changed-file list
;;
pr) # N = the PR number; works for same-repo and fork PRs
BASE=$(gh pr view "$N" --json baseRefName --jq .baseRefName 2>/dev/null || echo dev) # PRs target dev; gh may be absent
git fetch -q origin "$BASE" "+pull/$N/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr-$N" # + so a force-pushed PR head still updates
RANGE="origin/$BASE...origin/pr-$N"
git diff "$RANGE" -- . "${EXCLUDE[@]}" > "$OUT"
git diff --name-status "$RANGE" -- . "${EXCLUDE[@]}" # changed-file list
;;
paths) # PATHS = the files or directories named by the user; tracked changes plus untracked files under them
git diff HEAD -- "${PATHS[@]}" "${EXCLUDE[@]}" > "$OUT"
git ls-files --others --exclude-standard -- "${PATHS[@]}" "${EXCLUDE[@]}" | while read -r f; do git diff --no-index -- /dev/null "$f" >> "$OUT" || true; done
git status --porcelain -- "${PATHS[@]}" "${EXCLUDE[@]}" # changed-file list
;;
esac
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 Changed ee1af327a55c
- 1mo ago First seen · 150 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 6d78b1dccc97
pubky-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository pubky/pubky-app (26 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 2,689 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-16.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…