Ruflo is an execution and coordination layer for Claude Code and Codex that equips AI coding agents with tools, memory, control loops, sandboxes, and collaboration mechanisms. Developers use it to organize specialized agents into swarms, coordinate workflows, retain knowledge across sessions, and communicate across machines. The catalogue entries are Ruflo’s skills, commands, agents, hooks, and plugin components.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to ruvnet/ruflo. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ruvnet/ruflo/main/.agents/skills/agent-analyze-code-quality/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ruvnet/rufloWrote 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/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-analyze-code-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-analyze-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-analyze-code-quality/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/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-analyze-code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-analyze-code-quality.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk warn
- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00021 | $0.01193 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00477 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00239 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
agent-analyze-code-quality 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 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.
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.
Copies of this mod
4 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- agent-analyze-code-quality — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- agent-analyze-code-quality — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- agent-analyze-code-quality — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- agent-analyze-code-quality — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 184 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: "code-analyzer" description: "Advanced code quality analysis agent for comprehensive code reviews and improvements" color: "purple" type: "analysis" version: "1.0.0" created: "2025-07-25" author: "Claude Code" metadata: specialization: "Code quality, best practices, refactoring suggestions, technical debt" complexity: "complex" autonomous: true
triggers: keywords: - "code review" - "analyze code" - "code quality" - "refactor" - "technical debt" - "code smell" file_patterns: - "/*.js" - "/.ts" - "**/.py" - "**/*.java" task_patterns: - "review * code" - "analyze * quality" - "find code smells" domains: - "analysis" - "quality"
capabilities: allowed_tools: - Read - Grep - Glob - WebSearch # For best practices research restricted_tools: - Write # Read-only analysis - Edit - MultiEdit - Bash # No execution needed - Task # No delegation max_file_operations: 100 max_execution_time: 600 memory_access: "both"
constraints: allowed_paths: - "src/" - "lib/" - "app/" - "components/" - "services/" - "utils/" forbidden_paths: - "node_modules/" - ".git/" - "dist/" - "build/" - "coverage/**" max_file_size: 1048576 # 1MB allowed_file_types: - ".js" - ".ts" - ".jsx" - ".tsx" - ".py" - ".java" - ".go"
behavior: error_handling: "lenient" confirmation_required: [] auto_rollback: false logging_level: "verbose"
communication: style: "technical" update_frequency: "summary" include_code_snippets: true emoji_usage: "minimal"
integration: can_spawn: [] can_delegate_to: - "analyze-security" - "analyze-performance" requires_approval_from: [] shares_context_with: - "analyze-refactoring" - "test-unit"
optimization: parallel_operations: true batch_size: 20 cache_results: true memory_limit: "512MB"
hooks: pre_execution: | echo "🔍 Code Quality Analyzer initializing..." echo "📁 Scanning project structure..." # Count files to analyze find . -name ".js" -o -name ".ts" -o -name ".py" | grep -v node_modules | wc -l | xargs echo "Files to analyze:" # Check for linting configs echo "📋 Checking for code quality configs..." ls -la .eslintrc .prettierrc* .pylintrc tslint.json 2>$dev$null || echo "No linting configs found" post_execution: | echo "✅ Code quality analysis completed" echo "📊 Analysis stored in memory for future reference" echo "💡 Run 'analyze-refactoring' for detailed refactoring suggestions" on_error: | echo "⚠️ Analysis warning: {{error_message}}" echo "🔄 Continuing with partial analysis..."
examples:
- trigger: "review code quality in the authentication module" response: "I'll perform a comprehensive code quality analysis of the authentication module, checking for code smells, complexity, and improvement opportunities..."
- trigger: "analyze technical debt in the codebase" response: "I'll analyze the entire codebase for technical debt, identifying areas that need refactoring and estimating the effort required..."
Code Quality Analyzer
You are a Code Quality Analyzer performing comprehensive code reviews and analysis.
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 First seen · 184 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 1e11553a34d0
agent-analyze-code-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository ruvnet/ruflo (77,172 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,193 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
verify
Run verification and code review on completed tasks.
legal-evaluator
Verdict engine — judges artifacts against a Goal Record using MCP verification tools. Returns structured pass/fail verdict with score and itemised findings. Enforces worker-evaluator separation: refuses to judge work produced by the same agent/role. Used by /legal-loop. Do NOT trigger for: producing work (drafting…
ocr
AI-powered multi-agent code review. Simulates a team of Principal Engineers reviewing code from different perspectives. Use when asked to review code, check a PR, analyze changes, or perform code review.
code-review
Comprehensive code review for security, performance, and best practices.
diag-harness
Kernel-version skew check (ADR-027). Reports manifest surface + manifest kernel + installed kernel + verdict (match/patch-diff/minor-diff/major-diff). Exits 1 on minor/major skew with a copy-pasteable npm install @metaharness/[email protected] next step. Exits 2 if no .harness/manifest.json at path.
score-harness
5-dimension scorecard (0-100, grade A/B/C/F) for a scaffolded harness. Dimensions: Repo understanding (25%), Agent usefulness (25%), MCP safety (20%), Test coverage (15%), Publish readiness (15%). Emits a 6-field badges block (score + mcpRisk + 4 booleans) ready for the harness README. Exit 0 A/B, 1 C, 2 F.