A code-review workflow for a chosen range of commits or files. It checks correctness, security, performance, coding conventions, and tests, then reports findings without changing code.

Use it to review a feature, branch, recent commits, or selected files and produce a report of issues with rule references.

It gives reviews a fixed scope and consistent finding IDs and severity levels. This helps prevent unrelated files or changes from being reviewed accidentally.

feat-review — Skill for Claude Code and Codex by pwdev-solucoes

Install

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.

Any agent

npx skills add pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace --skill feat-review

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install pwdev-feat, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 13 skills, 8 commands.

Wrote 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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace/feat-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace/feat-review)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace/feat-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace/feat-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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace/feat-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace/feat-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 110 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 786 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.

Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.

Token cost

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	$0.00110	$0.00786
Opus 5.5	$0.00044	$0.00314
Sonnet 5.5	$0.00022	$0.00157
Haiku 4.5	$0.00011	$0.00079

Measured 27d ago against content hash b2d83142f848, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

feat-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 27d 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.

plugins/pwdev-feat/skills/feat-review/SKILL.md · 50 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 50 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Review plan

Plan type review — always executed in REPORT mode: findings only, no code change, no commit. The review contract (scope, finding fields, severities, dimensions, verdict) is references/review.md; read it before planning.

Procedure

Language — resolve lang (references/language.md).
Fix the scope — resolve the argument into an explicit BASE..TARGET range:
- a feature slug → base_commit from its progress.md/plan.done.md to HEAD;
- "last N commits" → HEAD~N..HEAD; a branch → $(git merge-base main <branch>)..<branch>;
- paths only → the range that last touched them, confirmed with the human. Record (audit on): sh "<plugin-root>/scripts/audit-log.sh" event review "" scope <base>..<target>. Build the package: sh "<plugin-root>/scripts/review_package.sh" <base> <target> .planning/feat/features/{slug}/review [-- <paths>]. Exit 2/3 (bad or empty range) → stop and ask; never widen the scope silently.
Method — follow references/pwdevia-method.md with plan_type: review:
- Persona: senior code reviewer for the stack in context/architecture.md.
- §3 lists the package files, the project instructions file, context/conventions.md, context/concerns.md and, when reviewing a feature, its plan.md.
- §4 lists ONLY .planning/feat/features/{slug}/review.md (rendered from templates/review-report.md) — this is what puts the executor in REPORT mode. Do not name it report.md: some runtimes refuse subagent writes to report-like names.
- §5: every finding has id, severity, path:line, rule citation, evidence and suggestion; the five dimensions are covered; lint/test commands run on the target and recorded.
After execution, when the verdict is CHANGES_REQUESTED, offer to turn the report's fix scope into a fix plan (feat-feature or feat-quick), citing the report in §3.

Prohibitions

Never fix code in a review plan, and never list project files in §4.
Never skip the security dimension.
Never rate a cosmetic issue above LOW, or a finding without a rule citation above LOW.
Never move HEAD in the working checkout — use a temporary worktree to inspect other states.

Read the full file on GitHub · 50 lines

Files

What ships with it

1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

agents/openai.yaml 184 B

Changes

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.

27d ago First seen · 50 lines · 110 tokens per session scan A b2d83142f848

Subscribe to this mod's changes

feat-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository pwdev-solucoes/pwdev-claude-marketplace (3 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 110 tokens to every session and 786 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-28.

Code review Security

autoreview

Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.

openclaw/clawhub · 17 tokens

omh-code-review

This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).

rlaope/oh-my-hermes · 48 tokens

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"…

umputun/revdiff · 84 tokens

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…

LilMGenius/paperthin · 70 tokens

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…

dzhng/skills · 162 tokens

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…

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills · 65 tokens