Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add Roxabi/roxabi-plugins/plugin install dev-coreWrote 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/roxabi/roxabi-plugins/dev-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/roxabi/roxabi-plugins/dev-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/roxabi/roxabi-plugins/dev-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/roxabi/roxabi-plugins/dev-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/roxabi/roxabi-plugins/dev-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 | $0.08226 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00038 | $0.03290 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.01645 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00823 |
Grade C, and why
R-dev-review scanned grade C with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Recursive force deletehighDestructive command
rm -rf with a variable or a broad path is one typo away from removing the wrong tree.
trap 'rm -rf "$REVIEW_TMP"' EXIT The source is not reproduced here
Licensed AGPL-3.0
The repository is licensed AGPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
What ships with it
13 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.
- __init__.py 0 B runs code
- __tests__/glob-retention.test.ts 820 B runs code
- __tests__/roster-example-keys.integration.test.ts 2.9 KB runs code
- __tests__/roster.integration.test.ts 46 KB runs code
- __tests__/skill-roster-parity.test.ts 4.8 KB runs code
- chunker.py 8.0 KB runs code
- digest.py 7.1 KB runs code
- README.md 5.5 KB
- review-blind-spots.md 5.0 KB
- review-classes.yml 12 KB
- review-smells.md 4.0 KB
- roster.sh 194 B runs code
- roster.ts 37 KB runs code
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · -63 lines bf690a9a0aec
- 1mo ago Changed · +45 lines · +96 tokens per session 4db3139bce22
- 1mo ago Changed · +4 lines 1a06daca38ce
- 1mo ago Changed · +80 lines c6f849c6116c
- 1mo ago First seen · 404 lines · 0 tokens per session scan C ecf2949844f1
R-dev-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Roxabi/roxabi-plugins (9 stars, last pushed today), licensed AGPL-3.0. It adds 96 tokens to every session and 8,226 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it C with 1 finding (recursive force delete). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
codex-oss-maintainer-toolkit
Build Codex-native workflows for open-source maintenance. Use when creating AGENTS.md guidance, maintainer skills, issue triage flows, PR review prompts, release-note routines, or repository verification scripts.
migration-review
Review database migration files when a change adds or modifies paths under migrations/. Use it before merge to collect forward, rollback, locking, and data-safety evidence.
adk-go-self-review
Review an ADK Go change the way a maintainer will — a fresh-context pass over the whole diff, five lenses (correctness and tests, scope, simplicity, style, adk-python parity), and the mutation check that proves your tests pin the change. Use before opening a PR, before any later push that changes code, and when asked…
learn-from-sage
Detection-gap (miss) analysis for Code Review Sage. Learn from shipped fixes, acted-on human comments, and design outcomes to close reviewer blind spots. Inline during review stages a candidate; a human triggers a one-shot AI consolidation into the live ruleset.
no-mistakes
Validate committed feature-branch changes through the no-mistakes pipeline: intent, rebase, review, test, docs, lint, push, PR, and CI. Use when the user asks to run no-mistakes, ship safely, validate before pushing, or gate a change before it reaches upstream.
package-optimizer
Evaluate one existing package or bounded package family from recorded evaluator evidence and a capability profile, then propose retain, simplify, strengthen, retire, or inconclusive without editing. Use when optimizing a skill, agent, hook, rule, command, utility, or preset; evaluating whether package detail is…