code-review

code-review is a skill for Claude Code from romiluz13/cc10x. It costs 53 tokens per session (3,097 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A two-part code-review method: one mode checks a code change for specification, quality, and security problems; the other verifies proposed fixes before accepting outside review comments.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review multi-file changes, inspect security-sensitive code, assess review feedback, and report only well-supported issues.
Why use it?
It promotes evidence-based review and filters out uncertain findings that would create unnecessary work.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter.

Part of the cc10x plugin — 22 skills, 14 agents, 10 hooks shipped together

Good fit Use it to review multi-file changes, inspect security-sensitive code, assess review feedback, and report only well-supported issues.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/romiluz13/cc10x/code-review
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.

Any agent
npx skills add romiluz13/cc10x --skill code-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/romiluz13/cc10x

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install cc10x, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 22 skills, 14 agents, 10 hooks.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for code-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/romiluz13/cc10x/code-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/romiluz13/cc10x/code-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/romiluz13/cc10x/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/romiluz13/cc10x/code-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for code-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/romiluz13/cc10x/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/romiluz13/cc10x/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 53 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 3,097 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
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 5.1 $0.00053 $0.03097
Opus 5.5 $0.00021 $0.01239
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00011 $0.00619
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00310

Measured 11d ago against content hash 42bc7228d9d1, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-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 11d 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.

plugins/cc10x/skills/code-review/SKILL.md · 193 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 193 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Review (Adversarial + Receiving)

Reference Files

Read only what's needed:

  • references/review-order-and-checkpoints.md — review order, checkpoint discipline; load when starting a review that spans multiple files or needs a checkpointed pass
  • references/code-review-heuristics.md — heuristics, pattern recognition, false-positive prevention; load when the diff is non-trivial or before reporting zero findings (Zero-Finding Halt re-scan)
  • references/security-review-checklist.md — security review checklist; load whenever the diff touches auth, input handling, network, secrets, or data access

Run ADVERSARIAL when producing findings on a diff; run RECEIVING when acting on findings someone else produced. The Code Smells catalog, AI-Generated Anti-Patterns, Metric Honesty Rule, and Deferred Findings handling below apply in both modes.

Mode: ADVERSARIAL REVIEW

Only report issues with confidence ≥80 — below that, a finding is more likely noise than signal, and noise burns the fix loop's time and trust. Do not inflate a score to smuggle a hunch through; a genuine security hunch goes to the Summary as an open question (see the Security exception under Confidence Scoring). Every finding states category, impact, and why it matters. Present a recommendation, not a menu. Be opinionated.

Signal quality rule: One finding with file:line evidence and a fix is worth more than ten generic observations. Never report a pattern without showing where it lives.

Two-Stage Review

Stage 1: Spec Compliance — Does the code do what the plan/spec asked? Check: phase exit criteria met, interfaces match plan's Consumes/Produces, no scope drift, no missing scenarios.

Stage 2: Code Quality — Is the code well-built? Check: correctness, performance, security, clarity, test coverage.

One-fact rule: On a consequential change, find the one fact the change is safe because of — a caller invariant, a lifecycle assumption, a data-shape contract at a boundary — and spend the review proving that fact instead of enumerating maybes. The fact is usually one a breakage grep will not surface. If you cannot prove it, the change is unreviewed; the maybes you listed do not change that.

Read the full file on GitHub · 193 lines

Files

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.

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. 11d ago Changed 42bc7228d9d1
  2. 1mo ago Changed · +17 lines b358c4f087bd
  3. 1mo ago First seen · 176 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 9c9ddb0a34c8

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository romiluz13/cc10x (165 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 3,097 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

issue-analyze

GitHub Issue and PR review thread deep analysis with Codex blind verdict. Use when: analyzing issue root cause, classifying problems, investigation planning, triaging PR review comments for actionability. Not for: fixing bugs (use bug-fix), code exploration (use code-explore). Output: classified analysis + verdict…

sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · 73 tokens

load-pr-review

Load GitHub PR review comments into AI session — analyze, triage, plan. Default: analysis-only (no auto-fix). Use when: reviewing PR feedback, planning fixes, addressing review comments, replying to reviewers. Not for: creating reviews (use codex-review-fast), creating PRs (use create-pr), viewing PR status (use…

sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · 77 tokens

best-practices

Industry best practices conformance audit with mandatory adversarial debate. Produces audit artifact: verdict (OK/WARN/FAIL) + gap roadmap + debate proof. Use when: auditing current implementation against industry standards, checking compliance with best practices, benchmarking implementation quality, verifying a…

sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · 101 tokens

pre-pr-audit

Pre-PR confidence audit with 5-dimension scoring. Use when: final check before commit/push/PR, evaluating PR readiness, assessing test quality + risk + coverage holistically. Triggers: pre-pr, readiness check, confidence audit, final verification, ready to PR, how confident. Not for: code review (use…

sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · 95 tokens

review-spec

Review technical spec documents from completeness, feasibility, risk, and code consistency perspectives.

sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · 19 tokens

codex-cli-review

Code review via Codex CLI with full disk access. Use when: deep review needing full codebase read, uncommitted change review. Not for: quick diff review (use codex-code-review), doc review (use doc-review). Output: severity-grouped findings + merge gate.

sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · 63 tokens