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 agentmods add skills/sammcj/agentic-coding/code-review-recent-changesnpx skills add sammcj/agentic-coding --skill code-review-recent-changesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sammcj/agentic-codingWhat 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 | $0.00066 | $0.02585 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00033 | $0.01293 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00517 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00259 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-recent-changes 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 3d 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review: Recent Changes
Review the diff between HEAD and a fixed point the user supplies, along three independent axes:
- Standards - does the code conform to this repo's documented conventions?
- Spec - does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / PRD / spec?
- Maintainability - is the change structurally healthy, or did it leave the codebase harder to change?
Each axis runs as its own parallel sub-agent so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings. Keep them separate: a change can pass one axis and fail another - code that follows every convention but implements the wrong thing (Standards pass, Spec fail), or does exactly what the issue asked while leaving the codebase messier (Spec pass, Maintainability fail). Separate reporting stops one axis from masking another.
Review stance
Two ideas shape how the sub-agents work, so build them into the briefs:
- Read outward from the diff. An agent handed a diff tends to treat it as the edge of the world. Tell each sub-agent to look past it: for a changed symbol, read its surrounding function/file and the modules that call it or that it calls. A hunk that looks fine in isolation can duplicate an existing helper, contradict a sibling module's pattern, or leave a half-finished migration two files over.
- Be ambitious on Maintainability; precise on Standards and Spec. Standards and Spec are close to binary - a documented rule is violated or it isn't, a requirement is met or it isn't - so favour precision and don't manufacture findings. Maintainability is where the valuable, easy-to-miss findings live, so favour recall: propose a restructuring even when you're not fully sure, because a wrong suggestion costs the reader one quick "no", while a worthwhile one you never raise is one nobody gets to consider. To keep the wrong ones cheap to dismiss, every Maintainability finding carries a confidence label and concrete evidence.
Process
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 3d ago First seen · 108 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A 80b70193da1f
code-review-recent-changes is a skill published in the GitHub repository sammcj/agentic-coding (158 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 2,585 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
ilya-sutskever
Agente que simula Ilya Sutskever — co-fundador da OpenAI, ex-Chief Scientist, fundador da SSI. Use quando quiser perspectivas sobre: AGI safety-first, consciência de IA, scaling laws, deep learning profundo, o episódio de novembro 2023 na OpenAI, superinteligência segura.
yann-lecun
Agente que simula Yann LeCun — inventor das Convolutional Neural Networks, Chief AI Scientist da Meta, Prêmio Turing 2018.
shopify-apps
Expert patterns for Shopify app development including Remix/React Router apps, embedded apps with App Bridge, webhook handling, GraphQL Admin API, Polaris components, billing, and app extensions.
llm-structured-output
Get reliable JSON, enums, and typed objects from LLMs using responseformat, tooluse, and schema-constrained decoding across OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google APIs.
tool-design
Build tools that agents can use effectively, including architectural reduction patterns. Use when creating new tools for agent systems, debugging tool-related failures or misuse, or optimizing existing tool sets for better agent performance.
yann-lecun-debate
Sub-skill de debates e posições de Yann LeCun. Cobre críticas técnicas detalhadas aos LLMs, rivalidades intelectuais (LeCun vs Hinton, Sutskever, Russell, Yudkowsky, Bostrom), lista completa de rejeições a afirmações mainstream, posição sobre risco existencial de IA, e técnicas de debate ao vivo.