Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to recca0120/code-quest. 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/recca0120/code-quest/main/.claude/skills/code-quest-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/recca0120/code-questWrote 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/recca0120/code-quest/code-quest-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/recca0120/code-quest/code-quest-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/recca0120/code-quest/code-quest-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/recca0120/code-quest/code-quest-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/recca0120/code-quest/code-quest-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 | $0.00096 | $0.01709 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00038 | $0.00684 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00342 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00171 |
Grade A, and why
code-quest-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 2mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 116 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Quest 專案特定 Code Review
除通用 /code-review skill 的審查維度外,本專案額外檢查以下項目。
Import
- import 放在檔案最頂部,不要 inline import(函式中間寫 import)
- Node.js built-in import(
node:path,node:fs)放最上方
isolatedDeclarations
summoner package 開啟了 isolatedDeclarations: true,影響:
- exported 變數必須有顯式型別標注 — 不可依賴推導,這不是冗餘
- schema 檔(
schemas.ts、launch-options.ts)的縮寫型別別名(Opt、Str、Num、Bool、Unk、Loose)是為了簡化這些必要標注,屬合理設計,不應移除 - 審查時看到 schema export 帶顯式型別,不要標為「冗餘型別標注」
Zod
.passthrough()/.loose()→ 改z.looseObject()(Zod v4 deprecated)- shared schema 只有一個 package 使用 → 搬到該 package
payload as { ... }inline type assertion → 改用 zod schema parse:- 先查 shared schemas 有沒有現有 schema 可用
- 沒有才新建,放 shared 讓前後端共用
- 不要 inline
z.looseObject({...}).parse(payload)— 那只是換一種 inline,應該抽成 named schema
跨 Package 對齊(shared / summoner / server / client)
- server
emitter.on('event', ...)的 event name 跟 sharedsocket-events.ts定義是否一致 - server
ch.sendRequest('event', ...)的 event name 跟 adapterREQUEST_MAPPINGS是否一致 - adapter
transformControlRequest產出的 event name 跟 server handler 訂閱的是否一致 - client handler on map 的 event name 跟 server emit 給 client 的是否對齊
- shared
ClientToServerEvents/ServerToClientEvents定義跟實際 emit/on 是否同步
summoner(CLI adapter)
REQUEST_MAPPINGS是否涵蓋所有ch.sendRequest呼叫的 event name- adapter transform 每個 case 是否都有 named function(不用 inline arrow)
isRecord()等 util 是否集中在utils.ts,不重複定義ProcessRunner終止方法只有kill()(底層呼叫 handle 的abort())— 不要再加abort()wrapperconsole.debug/console.log→ 改用logger(pino),注意 pino API 第一個參數是 object:logger.debug({ err }, 'message')
server handler
- middleware 是否正確:
- 需要 channel 且有 callback →
withError(withChannel(handler)) - 需要 channel 無 callback →
withChannel(handler) - 需要 socket →
withSocket(handler) - 不需要 channel → 直接註冊
- 需要 channel 且有 callback →
- handler 使用
ch.sendRequest('event', payload)不直接用 protocol subtype - handler 使用 named function(不用 arrow)
- handler 內
respondToRequest只在 auto-respond 或 CLI-initiated event 使用
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 116 lines · 96 tokens per session scan A d8d89f59c76e
code-quest-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository recca0120/code-quest (11 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 96 tokens to every session and 1,709 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
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"…
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…
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…
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…