reviewing-java

A structured reviewer for Java branches, pull requests, and diffs. A diff is the exact set of code changes between two versions, and each reported problem must point to evidence in those changes.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to find verified bugs and risks in Java changes, review pull requests, and audit a branch against project rules.
Why use it?
It reduces speculative warnings by requiring concrete code evidence and checks changes across areas such as security, concurrency, reliability, performance, and maintainability.

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/rootbr/rooted/reviewing-java
Any agent
npx skills add rootbr/rooted --skill reviewing-java
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rootbr/rooted

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 152 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 5,336 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 $0.00152 $0.05336
Opus 5 $0.00076 $0.02668
Sonnet 5 $0.00030 $0.01067
Haiku 4.5 $0.00015 $0.00534

Measured yesterday against content hash 86a3b1b11965, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

reviewing-java 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.

plugins/code-quality/skills/reviewing-java/SKILL.md · 427 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 427 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Java Reviewer

You are a Code Review Agent. You review Java code and produce actionable, verified findings.

Load-bearing rule: every finding MUST cite concrete code from the diff. No diff anchor → no finding — only speculation. One false positive erodes trust in the entire review; maximize real findings, minimize noise.

The workflow has six phases — Scope, Context, Agent Selection, Execute, Verify, Report — preceded by a Resume check. Each phase builds on the previous one, and you confirm with the user at three key points so the review stays collaborative rather than fire-and-forget.

reviewing-java/
├── SKILL.md
└── agents/
    ├── performance-reviewer/{prompt.md, references/checklist.md}
    ├── concurrency-reviewer/{prompt.md, references/checklist.md}
    ├── security-reviewer/{prompt.md, references/checklist.md}
    ├── reliability-reviewer/{prompt.md, references/checklist.md}
    ├── maintainability-reviewer/{prompt.md, references/checklist.md}
    ├── project-specific-reviewer/{prompt.md, references/checklist.md}
    └── verification-agent/prompt.md

Spawn prompts and reports persist under review/ at the repo root. Resume checkpoint for each agent: the presence of review/<agent>/report.md.

Runtime layout written under the target repo's review/ (per-agent folders are kept by default as an audit trail; cleanup is optional after the final two files land):

review/
├── state.md                              # scope + context + selection (end of Phase 3)
├── <agent>/prompt.md                     # exact spawn prompt passed to each agent
├── <agent>/report.md                     # findings written by the agent (resume checkpoint)
├── B<N>/{prompt,report}.md               # subsystem agents (MEDIUM/LARGE only)
├── verification/{prompt,report}.md       # Phase 5
├── java-review.md                        # Phase 6 deliverable
└── java-review-rejections.md             # Phase 6 deliverable

<agent> is a specialist reviewer directory name — one of { security, performance, concurrency, reliability, maintainability, project-specific } — or a subsystem ID B<N>.


Read the full file on GitHub · 427 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. yesterday First seen · 427 lines · 152 tokens per session scan A 86a3b1b11965

Subscribe to this mod's changes

reviewing-java is a skill published in the GitHub repository rootbr/rooted (21 stars, last pushed 26d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 152 tokens to every session and 5,336 once invoked, about $0.0008 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

next-cache-components-adoption

Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…

vercel/next.js · 95 tokens

babysit-pr

Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep…

openai/codex · 114 tokens

imagegen

Generate or edit raster images when the task benefits from AI-created bitmap visuals such as photos, illustrations, textures, sprites, mockups, or transparent-background cutouts. Use when Codex should create a brand-new image, transform an existing image, or derive visual variants from references, and the output…

openai/codex · 113 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens

next-cache-components-optimizer

Drive a Next.js route to instant navigation by setting up an agentic loop, under Cache Components / PPR, on initial load (hard navigation) and client-side navigation (soft navigation). Encode the goal as a failing @next/playwright instant() e2e and work it to green, one verified route at a time; the shipped test then…

vercel/next.js · 170 tokens