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 s977043/river-review --skill river-review-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/s977043/river-reviewWrote 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/s977043/river-review/river-review-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/s977043/river-review/river-review-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/s977043/river-review/river-review-code.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00051 | $0.02727 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.01363 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00545 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00273 |
Grade A, and why
river-review-code 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 7d 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 — 166 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Quality Review（一般コード品質レビュー）
コードの可読性、保守性、型安全性を検証する。他の専門エージェントに該当しない場合のデフォルトフォールバック先。
When to Use / いつ使うか
- 一般的なコード変更のレビュー時
- 他の専門エージェント（architecture, security, performance, testing）に該当しない場合
- コード品質の総合的なチェックが必要な場合
Routing / ルーティング
| キーワード | スキルID | 説明 |
|---|---|---|
| 型, TypeScript, strict | typescript-strict |
TypeScript strict モード準拠 |
| null, undefined, optional | typescript-nullcheck |
null 安全性チェック |
| 非同期, await, Promise | async-correctness |
非同期処理の正しさ検証 |
| 型駆動, 設計 | type-driven-design |
型駆動設計 |
| ログ, 監視 | logging-observability |
ロギング・可観測性 |
| 自動化, 境界 | review-automation-boundary |
レビュー自動化の境界 |
| コメント, トリアージ | review-comment-triage |
レビューコメント分類 |
| 幻覚的参照, 実在確認 | hallucinated-reference |
新規参照の実在確認 |
| 簡素化, 整理, simplify | SIMPLIFY 観点（本 skill 内） | 品質クリーンアップ4観点 |
| 破壊的操作, undo, 回復支援 | UX-SAFEGUARD 観点（本 skill 内） | 操作の安全装置2観点 |
UI/コンポーネント系のルーティング（a11y, デザインシステム, Next.js App Router 境界等）は
river-review-frontendに一元化済み（#1462）。本ルーターからは移設し、二重発火を避けている。
デフォルト動作
- キーワード指定なし → 以下のヒューリスティクスで判定:
.ts/.tsxファイル → TypeScript strict + nullチェック- コンポーネントファイル →
river-review-frontendも参照（a11y・デザインシステム観点は frontend 側が担当） - 設定ファイル → 型駆動設計チェック
Checklist / チェックリスト
一般コードレビューでは以下を確認する:
可読性
- 関数・変数の命名が意図を表現しているか
- 意図を伝えない広すぎる名前（
data/info/manager/handler/util/current）、共有されていない略語、同一概念の別名（または別概念の同名）がないか - 関数の責務が単一か
- ネストが深すぎないか（3段以内。深い場合は guard clause で平坦化を提案）
- マジックナンバー・マジックストリングがないか
保守性
- DRY原則にしたがっているか（ただし過度な抽象化を避ける）
- 変更の影響範囲が限定的か
- 依存方向が正しいか
- カプセル化リークがないか: オブジェクト内部へ深く手を伸ばすコード（
a.b.c.type === 'x'）、値オブジェクトから primitive を取り出して外部で分岐、getter による内部状態の露出。Tell-Don't-Ask（例:user.subscription.plan.type === 'premium'よりuser.isPremium()）を推奨する（Law of Demeter）
What ships with it
3 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.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 166 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 88c13e0858ba
river-review-code is a skill published in the GitHub repository s977043/river-review (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 2,727 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
logic-health
Sweep a directory, module, or full codebase for logic correctness and produce a scored health dashboard with systemic patterns. Trigger when the user requests a health view — "audit the whole codebase", "health check", "health overview", "logic health overview", "audit src/", "audit auth and payments modules", "where…
logic-diff
Compare two code versions for semantic equivalence via semi-formal tracing of both versions side-by-side. Trigger when the user shares a refactor, rewrite, migration, or A/B implementation and wants to confirm behavior is unchanged — "did I break anything", "is this equivalent", "are these equivalent", "semantically…
deep-review
Multi-angle code review that adapts to what is being reviewed — a mid-flight worktree increment, a full PR before production, a merge-window integration sweep, or a security-only pass. Findings are scored, adversarially refuted, widened to the same defect elsewhere in the codebase, and reported to the native review…
review-loop
Cross-LLM iterative code review loop. Spawns a peer reviewer (Codex, Claude, or Gemini CLI) to review code changes, then iterates until both agents agree on the final code state. Code gets modified during the loop — the final output is improved code + consensus report. Use when: "review loop", "peer review", "cross…
brooks-audit
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized…
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…