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 agentmods add skills/rampstackco/claude-skills/code-review-webnpx skills add rampstackco/claude-skills --skill code-review-webgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rampstackco/claude-skillsWrote 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/rampstackco/claude-skills/code-review-web)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rampstackco/claude-skills/code-review-web"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rampstackco/claude-skills/code-review-web.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00121 | $0.02322 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00060 | $0.01161 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00464 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00232 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-web 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 4d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- code-review-web — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 214 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review for Web
Review and debug web application code with a focus on the patterns that actually break production. Stack-agnostic principles in SKILL.md. Stack-specific patterns in references.
When to use
- Reviewing a pull request before merging
- Debugging a production issue
- Investigating a build failure
- Auditing security or performance of existing code
- Investigating environment variable or configuration issues
- Triaging a "the site is broken" report
When NOT to use
- Writing a new feature spec (use
pm-spec-writing) - Pre-launch QA against the running site (use
qa-testing) - Performance deep-dive on Core Web Vitals (use
performance-optimization) - Deep accessibility compliance review (use
accessibility-audit)
Required inputs
- The code, PR, error message, or symptom under review
- Access to logs (build logs, function logs, server logs) if debugging
- The stack (framework, hosting, database) - even at high level
If just a symptom is provided ("the site is broken"), the workflow's first step is gathering enough context to investigate.
The framework: 5 review dimensions
Every code review covers five dimensions. Pick the depth based on the situation.
1. Correctness
Does the code do what it claims to do?
- Logic matches the intent stated in the spec or PR description
- Edge cases handled (empty states, error states, network failures)
- Off-by-one errors, null/undefined handling, async race conditions
- Tests exist for the change, or there's a reason they don't
- The change does not break existing functionality (regression risk)
2. Security
Does the code expose anything sensitive or open an attack surface?
- Secrets handling. No secrets, API keys, or service-role credentials in client-side code or version control
- Auth checks. Every mutation endpoint validates the caller before acting
- Input validation. User input sanitized before use in queries, file paths, or HTML
- External requests. Outbound URLs validated; no SSRF on user-controlled inputs
- CSRF protection. State-changing requests require a token or same-origin policy
- Rate limiting. Public-facing mutation endpoints have rate limits
- HTTPS-only. No HTTP in production code paths
- Cookies. Session cookies have
Secure,HttpOnly,SameSiteattributes set - Environment variables. Server-only secrets are not prefixed with anything that exposes them to the client bundle
What ships with it
3 files 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 214 lines · 121 tokens per session scan A 1833c32ede91
code-review-web is a skill published in the GitHub repository rampstackco/claude-skills (814 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 121 tokens to every session and 2,322 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
sparc-methodology
SPARC (Specification, Pseudocode, Architecture, Refinement, Completion) comprehensive development methodology with multi-agent orchestration.
swarm-advanced
Advanced swarm orchestration patterns for research, development, testing, and complex distributed workflows.
agent-harness-fault-injection
Use when an agent workflow needs deterministic recovery evidence for sandbox, MCP/tool, worker, checkpoint, memory, or orchestration failures.
workflow
Professional AI programming assistant with structured workflow (Research -> Ideate -> Plan -> Execute -> Optimize -> Review) for developers.
golden-rss
Use when testing the rss golden build.
r3f-best-practices
React Three Fiber (R3F) and Poimandres ecosystem best practices. Use when writing, reviewing, or optimizing R3F code. Triggers on tasks involving @react-three/fiber, @react-three/drei, zustand, @react-three/postprocessing, @react-three/rapier, or leva.