skillshare is a command-line tool that keeps AI coding-agent skills, agents, rules, commands, prompts, and other file-based resources synchronized from one source across many AI CLI tools. Individuals and teams use it to share and manage these resources across projects and organizations. The catalogue entries are skillshare commands and skills.
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.
npx skills add runkids/skillshare --skill skillshare-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/runkids/skillshareWrote 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/runkids/skillshare/skillshare-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/runkids/skillshare/skillshare-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/runkids/skillshare/skillshare-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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/runkids/skillshare/skillshare-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/runkids/skillshare/skillshare-code-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 | $0.00124 | $0.01448 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00050 | $0.00579 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00290 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00145 |
Grade A, and why
skillshare-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 82 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review one change in five independent passes, verify every finding, and report them by pass. $ARGUMENTS names the target (a base ref, a PR number, or a path) and may end with fix.
Scope: Read-only by default. With fix, apply only verified findings that do not change intended behavior, then run the checks the testing topic names. Never commit, push, or comment on GitHub unless the user asks.
Before acting, run python3 scripts/ai-context.py pull-requests. Its Review Rounds section defines what a review must sweep before Codex sees the change; this skill is how that sweep runs.
Step 1: Pin the diff
| $ARGUMENTS | Diff |
|---|---|
| empty | git diff origin/main...HEAD plus git diff HEAD (uncommitted work counts) |
| a ref | git diff <ref>...HEAD plus git diff HEAD |
| a PR number | check the PR out in a new scratch worktree (git worktree add, then gh pr checkout <n> inside it) and review there with git diff origin/<base>...HEAD, so Step 4 reads the PR's code, not the current branch |
| a path | that file or directory, reviewed whole |
Run git fetch origin first so the base is current. Stop here if the ref does not resolve or the diff is empty. In a shared checkout, list files changed by another session (git status) and leave them out of scope.
Step 2: Gather context once
- Spec: in order, issue references in commit messages or the PR body (
gh issue view <n>), a path in $ARGUMENTS, or a matching file inspecs/. If none exists, the Spec pass reports "no spec". - Rules:
AGENTS.md, plus the topics for the touched areas. Runpython3 scripts/ai-context.py listand pick by path:cmd/andinternal/→cli-development;ui/orwebsite/src/→frontend; docs, READMEs,skills/→documentation;wiki/→ai-context. - Concepts: name each flag, field, error, config key, API route, or behavior the diff adds or alters. The Consumer pass sweeps these.
Step 3: Run five passes in parallel
Launch one subagent per pass in a single message, using your tool's default subagent model; do not name a model the tool may not have. If your tool has no subagents, run the passes yourself one after another. Give each the diff command, the context from Step 2, and its brief below. Each returns findings as file:line, a one-sentence claim, and a concrete scenario (input or state → wrong result). A finding without a scenario is not reported.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 82 lines · 124 tokens per session scan A db7db0e26517
skillshare-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository runkids/skillshare (2,789 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 124 tokens to every session and 1,448 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-10-14.
Other skills, from other repositories
hz-unity-code-review
Reviews Unity code targeting Meta VR and Horizon OS for performance issues, rendering best practices, and common VR pitfalls. Use during code review or when diagnosing Meta VR performance problems in Unity projects.
doris-repo-review
Review an Apache Doris PR from a local clone with the same multi-agent, shared-ledger convergence workflow as the CI Code Review Runner. Use when the user supplies a PR to /doris-repo-review, asks to review a Doris PR locally, or asks for the CI-style review flow. Safely align only the current worktree to the exact PR…
rules-code-type-safety
The rules for the parameters, the properties and the return type of a signature. Use when you write a new method, a new function, a new class, a new constructor or a new property, when you add a parameter to a signature that exists, when you change what a method takes or what it returns, when you let a caller choose a…
rules-code-immutability
The rules for the state of an object. Use when you write a new class, a new struct or a new record, when you write a constructor, when you add a property to a type that exists, when you write a setter or a method that writes a property of its own object, when a caller needs an object with one different value, when a…
rules-code-without-slop
The rules for the code that carries no evidence, which a reader names slop. Use when you write a new method or a new function, when you finish a change, when you read a request, a file, a document or a row of a database, when you check the type of a value in the middle of the program, when you write a try and a catch…
rules-code-public-api
The rules for the public API of a package and the visibility of each item. Use when you write a new type, a new method or a new constructor, when you change the visibility of a type or of a member, when a caller outside this project can reach a type or a member, when you add a parameter to a signature that a caller…