requesting-code-review

Instructions for asking a separate coding agent to review completed work. Code review is a technical check for defects, missed requirements, and merge risks.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it after a task or major feature, and before merging, by giving the reviewer the changes, requirements, and starting and ending Git revisions.
Why use it?
It catches problems before they spread to later work or reach the main branch of the repository.

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

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 22 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 659 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 83% copy Near-identical to another mod 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 $0.00022 $0.00659
Opus 5 $0.00011 $0.00329
Sonnet 5 $0.00004 $0.00132
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00066

Measured 2d ago against content hash 1017ccdd5bc6, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

requesting-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 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.

Origin

This is a copy

83% identical to requesting-code-review — 20 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.

eval/local/skills/benchmarks/dependency/superpowers/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md · 104 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 104 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Requesting Code Review

Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Mandatory:

  • After each task in subagent-driven development
  • After completing major feature
  • Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

  • When stuck (fresh perspective)
  • Before refactoring (baseline check)
  • After fixing complex bug

How to Request

1. Get git SHAs:

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)  # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:

Dispatch a general-purpose subagent, filling the template at code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

  • {DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary of what you built
  • {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do
  • {BASE_SHA} - Starting commit
  • {HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit

3. Act on feedback:

  • Fix Critical issues immediately
  • Fix Important issues before proceeding
  • Note Minor issues for later
  • Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
  DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
  PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
  BASE_SHA: a7981ec
  HEAD_SHA: 3df7661

[Subagent returns]:
  Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
  Issues:
    Important: Missing progress indicators
    Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
  Assessment: Ready to proceed

You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]

Integration with Workflows

Read the full file on GitHub · 104 lines

Files

What ships with it

1 file 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. 2d ago First seen · 104 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 1017ccdd5bc6

Subscribe to this mod's changes

requesting-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository rpamis/comet (2,902 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 659 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 83% identical to requesting-code-review, differing in 20 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

agent-spec-tool-first

CRITICAL: Use for agent-spec CLI tool workflow. Triggers on: agent-spec, contract, lifecycle, guard, verify, explain, stamp, checkpoint, plan, requirements, work-units, knowledge requirements, KLL, docs vs knowledge, spec verification, task contract, spec quality, lint spec, run log, "how to verify", "how to use…

ZhangHanDong/agent-spec · 165 tokens

agent-spec-authoring

CRITICAL: Use for writing and editing agent-spec .spec/.spec.md files. Triggers on: write spec, create spec, edit spec, new spec, spec authoring, task contract, .spec file, .spec.md file, BDD scenario, acceptance criteria, completion criteria, test selector, boundary, constraint, intent, decision, out of scope, "how…

ZhangHanDong/agent-spec · 172 tokens

agent-spec-estimate

CRITICAL: Use for estimating work effort from agent-spec Task Contracts. Triggers on: estimate, estimation, how long, work effort, round count, time estimate, scope, sizing, cost, budget, planning, sprint, capacity, "how many rounds", "how long will this take", "estimate this spec", 估算, 工作量, 多久, 时间估算, 预估, 工时, 规模…

ZhangHanDong/agent-spec · 116 tokens

agent-spec-intent-compiler

Use when converting PRD or issue prose into KLL requirements, running the intent compiler plan, or reverse-interviewing a human to resolve requirement ambiguity before task spec generation.

ZhangHanDong/agent-spec · 42 tokens

agent-spec-wiki

Use when initializing, checking, enriching, or reviewing agent-spec code live wiki pages, sourcefiles trace, or Rust architecture inventory.

ZhangHanDong/agent-spec · 31 tokens

create-request

Create, update, or scan per-task request tickets for progress tracking. These are date-prefixed non-lifecycle docs under requests/, NOT feature-level requirements (use /req-analyze for those). Use when: tracking task progress, updating completion status, scanning incomplete requests, checking request status dashboard.…

sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · 112 tokens