fix

A workflow for applying issues that a human has selected from a code review. Code review is the process of examining changes for defects, risks, and maintainability problems.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it after review triage to inspect marked findings, make minimal code changes, run tests, and record what was fixed.
Why use it?
It keeps fixes focused on confirmed review findings and requires testing to catch regressions, meaning new problems caused by a fix.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/rbah31/claude-code-workflow/fix
Any agent
npx skills add rbah31/claude-code-workflow --skill fix
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rbah31/claude-code-workflow

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 83 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,140 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00083 $0.01140
Opus 5 $0.00042 $0.00570
Sonnet 5 $0.00017 $0.00228
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00114

Measured 2d ago against content hash 6b140b4ea09f, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

fix 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 2d 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.

.claude/skills/fix/SKILL.md · 130 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 130 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Fix Phase

You are running the fix phase. Your job is to fix all issues the human marked as "fix" in the review output — efficiently and correctly.

Step 1 — Load context

Read the triaged review output: tasks/sprints/sprint-*/review-output.md. Read tasks/lessons.md — avoid repeating past fix mistakes.

Identify all items marked as "fix" (or "critical" / "major" that weren't explicitly deferred).

Step 2 — Fix issues

For each issue to fix:

  1. Understand the issue — read the finding, the file, and the context.
  2. Plan if complex — if the fix touches 3+ files, switch to plan mode first to design the approach.
  3. Implement the fix — make the minimal change that resolves the issue. Don't refactor unrelated code.
  4. Run tests — verify the fix works and doesn't break anything else.
  5. Document — note what you did in the fix output.

If a fix introduces a new issue or breaks something: stop, assess, and fix the regression before moving on.

Investigation-shaped findings cannot be deferred

If a review finding requires a quick investigation to diagnose (a grep to confirm a code path exists, a read to verify the production shape of an input, a 5-second check on whether a function already handles the case), do that investigation now — not later.

Specifically: do not mark such a finding as "deferred to claude -p investigation" during the fix phase. Treat the deferral pattern as an anti-pattern: the investigation it points to is almost always shorter than the deferral message itself.

Decision rule:

  • Investigation < 15 minutes (a grep, a read, a short script) → do it inside the current fix phase, before declaring the finding resolved or deferred.
  • Investigation ≥ 15 minutes (cross-cutting refactor, semantic ambiguity, requires architectural review) → escalate to the human with explicit scope, do not silently defer.

The deferral pattern hides Critical findings under the guise of "need to investigate", lets the sprint close, and the bug ships. Closing a finding requires either a fix or a deliberate, scope-explicit escalation — never a vague "investigation later".

Read the full file on GitHub · 130 lines

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 130 lines · 83 tokens per session scan A 6b140b4ea09f

Subscribe to this mod's changes

fix is a skill published in the GitHub repository rbah31/claude-code-workflow (5 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 83 tokens to every session and 1,140 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

agent-code-analyzer

Agent skill for code-analyzer - invoke with $agent-code-analyzer.

ruvnet/ruflo · 19 tokens

agent-collective-intelligence-coordinator

Agent skill for collective-intelligence-coordinator - invoke with $agent-collective-intelligence-coordinator.

ruvnet/ruflo · 29 tokens

agent-payments

Agent skill for payments - invoke with $agent-payments.

ruvnet/ruflo · 15 tokens

agui-dotnet-cross-language-tests

Author cross-language interop tests that verify the AG-UI .NET SDK is wire-compatible with the TypeScript SDK — a Vitest TS client driving a C# CrossLanguage.TestServer over HTTP, both directions, including protobuf byte-parity against @ag-ui/proto. USE FOR: adding or modifying cross-language interop coverage…

ag-ui-protocol/ag-ui · 146 tokens

agui-dotnet-streaming-chat

Get started with the AG-UI .NET SDK: bootstrap and run your first streaming-chat app (client + server) with the AG-UI .NET NuGet packages (AGUI.Client, AGUI.Server, AGUI.Formatting, AGUI.Abstractions). USE FOR: which packages to install and how to wire them; constructing an AGUIChatClient against an endpoint and…

ag-ui-protocol/ag-ui · 223 tokens

agui-dotnet-sample-step

Add a GettingStarted sample Step (a Server/Client pair) to the AG-UI .NET SDK that demonstrates one protocol feature the way we want users to write it. USE FOR: adding a new samples/GettingStarted/StepNN Server+Client pair, wiring it into AGUI.slnx and the integration-test project, giving it a deterministic…

ag-ui-protocol/ag-ui · 168 tokens