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 ralvarezdev/ralvaskills --skill codebase-hygiene-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ralvarezdev/ralvaskillsWrote 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/ralvarezdev/ralvaskills/codebase-hygiene-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ralvarezdev/ralvaskills/codebase-hygiene-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ralvarezdev/ralvaskills/codebase-hygiene-reviewer/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/ralvarezdev/ralvaskills/codebase-hygiene-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ralvarezdev/ralvaskills/codebase-hygiene-reviewer.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 | $0.00060 | $0.01336 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00534 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00267 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00134 |
Grade A, and why
codebase-hygiene-reviewer 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 yesterday.
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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed GPL-3.0
The repository is licensed GPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 76 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A c0334daf58d8
codebase-hygiene-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository ralvarezdev/ralvaskills (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed GPL-3.0. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 1,336 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 2026-10-23.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr-review
Address feedback left on a GitHub pull request: fetch unresolved review threads, make agreed Elixir/Phoenix code fixes, reply, and resolve. Use for a PR URL/number or reviewer comments. NOT for pre-PR review, findings triage, or CI monitoring.
phx-pr-review
Address feedback left on a GitHub pull request: fetch unresolved review threads, make agreed Elixir/Phoenix code fixes, reply, and resolve. Use for a PR URL/number or reviewer comments. NOT for pre-PR review, findings triage, or CI monitoring.
056-design-avoid-breaking-changes
Use when you need to review a plan, OpenSpec change, specification, or implementation proposal for breaking-change risk across commands, skills, generated outputs, XML sources, README/docs, tests, CI, APIs, schemas, configuration, data, migration, and release guidance. This should trigger for requests such as Review…
longbridge-earnings
Earnings analysis — pre- and post-earnings. Pre-earnings preview: prior-guidance review, recent-events tracking, last call's Q&A, and a key-things-to-watch framework for an upcoming release. Post-earnings: two tiers — a fast in-chat summary card (default) and a full Markdown research report (on request). Covers…
babysit-pr
Resolve reviewer comments on a pull request or pasted feedback using a six-step evidence-grounded protocol. Use when asked to resolve review feedback, address reviewer comments, process PR comments, triage review feedback, apply review suggestions, handle code review feedback, decide which review comments to accept or…
pre-merge
Primary pipeline review step after verified implementation. Use to create a PR with lineage and run architectural review before merge. Not for QA intake, planning, or implementation work.