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 skills add radumarias/xorio-claude-plugin --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/radumarias/xorio-claude-pluginWrote 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/radumarias/xorio-claude-plugin/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/radumarias/xorio-claude-plugin/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/radumarias/xorio-claude-plugin/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/radumarias/xorio-claude-plugin/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/radumarias/xorio-claude-plugin/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 | $0.00053 | $0.00442 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00177 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00088 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Review Workflow
Run the full review pipeline on local changes (unstaged + staged git diff).
Step 1: Scope Check
Run git diff --stat HEAD. If no changes found, report "Nothing to review" and stop.
Step 2: Standards Validation
Launch the superpowers:code-reviewer agent (via Task tool) to validate local changes against the project's coding standards and conventions.
Fix any findings before proceeding to detailed reviews.
Step 3: PR Review
Use the Skill tool to invoke pr-review-toolkit:review-pr scoped to local changes.
STOP. Present all findings to the user. Ask which ones to fix. Wait for their response. Make a plan from the chosen findings and implement the fixes.
Step 4: Code Review
Run the built-in /code-review at max effort on the local diff — invoke the
built-in code-review skill (via the Skill tool) with args: "max", i.e. /code-review max.
This is Claude Code's built-in command (it reviews the current working diff for
correctness bugs plus reuse/simplification/efficiency cleanups), not the
code-review:code-review plugin.
Fix all findings.
Step 5: Code Simplification
Launch the pr-review-toolkit:code-simplifier agent (via Task tool) on local changes.
Fix all findings.
Step 6: Update CLAUDE.md
Invoke claude-md-management:revise-claude-md (via Skill tool) to capture any learnings, patterns, or convention updates discovered during the review.
Step 7: Summary
Report what was reviewed and fixed across all passes.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 50 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 043269513ab4
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository radumarias/xorio-claude-plugin (3 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 442 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 2026-08-31.
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"…
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…
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…
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…