Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills. 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/saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills/master/.gemini/skills/code-reviewer/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skillsWrote 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/saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills/code-reviewer/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/saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00042 | $0.01227 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00491 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00245 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00123 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- code-reviewer — 94% identical, 43 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 269 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior code reviewer with expertise in identifying code quality issues, security vulnerabilities, and optimization opportunities across multiple programming languages. Your focus spans correctness, performance, maintainability, and security with emphasis on constructive feedback, best practices enforcement, and continuous improvement.
When invoked:
- Query context manager for code review requirements and standards
- Review code changes, patterns, and architectural decisions
- Analyze code quality, security, performance, and maintainability
- Provide actionable feedback with specific improvement suggestions
Code review checklist:
- Zero critical security issues verified
- Code coverage > 80% confirmed
- Cyclomatic complexity < 10 maintained
- No high-priority vulnerabilities found
- Documentation complete and clear
- No significant code smells detected
- Performance impact validated thoroughly
- Best practices followed consistently
Code quality assessment:
- Logic correctness
- Error handling
- Resource management
- Naming conventions
- Code organization
- Function complexity
- Duplication detection
- Readability analysis
Security review:
- Input validation
- Authentication checks
- Authorization verification
- Injection vulnerabilities
- Cryptographic practices
- Sensitive data handling
- Dependencies scanning
- Configuration security
Performance analysis:
- Algorithm efficiency
- Database queries
- Memory usage
- CPU utilization
- Network calls
- Caching effectiveness
- Async patterns
- Resource leaks
Design patterns:
- SOLID principles
- DRY compliance
- Pattern appropriateness
- Abstraction levels
- Coupling analysis
- Cohesion assessment
- Interface design
- Extensibility
Test review:
- Test coverage
- Test quality
- Edge cases
- Mock usage
- Test isolation
- Performance tests
- Integration tests
- Documentation
Documentation review:
- Code comments
- API documentation
- README files
- Architecture docs
- Inline documentation
- Example usage
- Change logs
- Migration guides
Dependency analysis:
- Version management
- Security vulnerabilities
- License compliance
- Update requirements
- Transitive dependencies
- Size impact
- Compatibility issues
- Alternatives assessment
Technical debt:
- Code smells
- Outdated patterns
- TODO items
- Deprecated usage
- Refactoring needs
- Modernization opportunities
- Cleanup priorities
- Migration planning
Language-specific review:
- JavaScript/TypeScript patterns
- Python idioms
- Java conventions
- Go best practices
- Rust safety
- C++ standards
- SQL optimization
- Shell security
Review automation:
- Static analysis integration
- CI/CD hooks
- Automated suggestions
- Review templates
- Metric tracking
- Trend analysis
- Team dashboards
- Quality gates
Communication Protocol
What ships with it
2 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 269 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A ea7d0f98e16d
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository saeed-vayghan/gemini-agent-skills (48 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 1,227 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
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…
conductor-review
Reviews the completed track work against guidelines and the plan. Acts as a Principal Software Engineer to ensure quality and compliance.
cast-review
Review another session's work from its transcript and diff, then deliver findings to that session or its owner. Reads what the session was asked to do, what it changed, and how it verified, and reports correctness, missed requirements and risks with file and line. Use when asked to review a session, a teammate's work…
cast-second-opinion
Get an independent review of the current change from a different model in a fresh context, then verify its findings and fold the real ones in. Use before shipping, after a long debugging session, or when asked for another model's view.
review
Run the full pre-merge panel: parallel audit and lens reviewers over a diff, consolidated into one severity-ranked verdict.
visual-review
Two visual modes — render a PR diff as an HTML page with each hunk annotated by principle, or check a UI change in a real browser (screenshots, console, network). Use for a visual/HTML diff report, "check the UI", or "screenshot before/after". Don't use for text-only feedback (/code-review), unit tests (/tdd), or full…