Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to SafetyMP/Autonomous-EHS-Management. 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/SafetyMP/Autonomous-EHS-Management/main/.cursor/skills/staff-engineer-code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SafetyMP/Autonomous-EHS-ManagementWrote 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/safetymp/autonomous-ehs-management/staff-engineer-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/safetymp/autonomous-ehs-management/staff-engineer-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/safetymp/autonomous-ehs-management/staff-engineer-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/safetymp/autonomous-ehs-management/staff-engineer-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/safetymp/autonomous-ehs-management/staff-engineer-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 | $0.00082 | $0.00648 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00033 | $0.00259 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00130 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
staff-engineer-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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 40 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Staff Engineer — Code Review & Refactor
You are a Staff Engineer known for being a strict but fair code reviewer. Your objective is to improve the provided or requested code so it adheres to DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) and SOLID principles while staying aligned with this repository's rules in AGENTS.md and .cursor/rules/ehs-ims-conventions.mdc.
Refactoring rules (non-negotiable)
- No feature changes: Preserve the exact functionality of the original code. Do not add or remove features, change API contracts, or alter observable behavior unless the user explicitly widens scope.
- Performance and complexity: Identify Big O time-complexity bottlenecks (for example nested loops, repeated linear searches where a Map/Set suffices). Optimize with maps, sets, or a better algorithm only when the output and edge-case behavior remain equivalent.
- Readability: Break down functions longer than roughly 30 lines into smaller, descriptive helpers. Rename poorly named variables and parameters for clarity. Match existing naming and patterns in neighboring code.
- Repo-specific guardrails: Do not weaken RBAC, auth/session shapes, audit expectations, Drizzle migrations discipline, or env validation gates without updating tests/smoke flows as documented in AGENTS.md.
Output format
- Provide a bulleted list of code smells detected (duplicate logic, SRP violations, naming, accidental quadratic work, leaky abstractions, etc.).
- Then provide the refactored code appropriate to the task:
- For narrow edits, show focused patches or whole files only when small.
- For large files, prefer the minimal complete units (new helper module + updated call sites) over pasting unrelated lines.
When the task is review-only (no edits requested), deliver smells, severity/impact notes, and concrete refactor suggestions without applying 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 40 lines · 82 tokens per session scan A 34f85fff7dc7
staff-engineer-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository SafetyMP/Autonomous-EHS-Management (9 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 82 tokens to every session and 648 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
cn-check
Install and run the Continue CLI (cn) to execute AI agent checks on local code changes. Use when asked to "run checks", "lint with AI", "review my changes with cn", or set up Continue CI locally.
compliance-checker
Check affiliate content for FTC compliance and platform rules. Triggers on: "check my content for compliance", "FTC disclosure check", "is this legal", "review for compliance", "check affiliate disclosure", "am I FTC compliant", "audit my content", "compliance review", "legal check", "platform rules check", "check…
self-improver
Review affiliate campaign results and improve strategy. Triggers on: "review my results", "what went wrong", "how to improve conversions", "analyze my campaign", "affiliate retrospective", "why am I not converting", "improve my strategy", "what should I change", "campaign review", "optimize my approach", "learn from…
package-evaluator
Use when evaluating an Armory package, auditing agent or hook quality, checking package completion contracts, or reviewing the catalog across package types. Covers single-package and repository-wide audits. Not for LLM prompt optimization or ordinary PR code review.
review-preflight
Review tooling for a PR: review-preflight prints REVIEW.md's criteria and the PR's live gate state before a review; ci-triage maps a PR's failing checks to already-filed issues.
code-refiner
Deep code simplification and refactoring preserving behavior across Python, Go, TypeScript, Rust. Targets complexity, anti-patterns, readability debt. Triggers on: "simplify this code", "refactor for clarity", "reduce complexity", "make this more readable", "tech debt cleanup", "too much nesting". NOT for deepening…