Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server. 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/quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server/main/.claude/skills/code-review-security/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-serverWrote 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/quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server/code-review-security)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server/code-review-security"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server/code-review-security/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/quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server/code-review-security"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server/code-review-security.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 | $0.00102 | $0.03677 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.01839 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00735 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00368 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-security scanned grade A with 1 finding 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.
Runs shell commandslowCapability
Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.
subprocess.run(f"convert {filename}", shell=True) This is a copy
100% identical to code-review-security — 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 — 486 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Security
When to Use
Activate this skill when:
- Reviewing pull requests for security vulnerabilities
- Auditing authentication or authorization code changes
- Reviewing code that handles user input, file uploads, or external data
- Checking for OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities in new features
- Validating that secrets are not committed to the repository
- Scanning dependencies for known vulnerabilities
- Reviewing API endpoints that expose sensitive data
Output: Write findings to security-review.md with severity, file:line, description, and recommendations.
Do NOT use this skill for:
- Deployment infrastructure security (use
docker-best-practices) - Incident response procedures (use
incident-response) - General code quality review without security focus (use
pre-merge-checklist) - Writing implementation code (use
python-backend-expertorreact-frontend-expert)
Instructions
OWASP Top 10 Checklist
Review every PR against the OWASP Top 10 (2021 edition). Each category below includes specific checks for Python/FastAPI and React codebases.
A01: Broken Access Control
What to look for:
- Missing authorization checks on endpoints
- Direct object reference without ownership verification
- Endpoints that expose data without role-based filtering
- Missing
Depends()for auth on new routes
Python/FastAPI checks:
# BAD: No authorization check -- any authenticated user can access any user
@router.get("/users/{user_id}")
async def get_user(user_id: int, db: Session = Depends(get_db)):
return await user_repo.get(user_id)
# GOOD: Verify the requesting user owns the resource or is admin
@router.get("/users/{user_id}")
async def get_user(
user_id: int,
current_user: User = Depends(get_current_user),
db: Session = Depends(get_db),
):
if current_user.id != user_id and current_user.role != "admin":
raise HTTPException(status_code=403, detail="Forbidden")
return await user_repo.get(user_id)
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.
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 · 486 lines · 102 tokens per session scan A 6a7d57ae5b2f
code-review-security is a skill published in the GitHub repository quality-screener/quality-screener-mcp-server (0 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 102 tokens to every session and 3,677 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (runs shell commands). It is 100% identical to code-review-security, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
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"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.