sanyuan-skills is a collection of reusable instructions, called agent skills, that extend Claude Code and other AI coding terminals with defined workflows. Developers use it for code review, learning, skill quality checks, skill creation, and organizing knowledge into wikis or study materials. The catalogue entries are individual skills from this collection.
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 sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills --skill code-review-expertgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sanyuan0704/sanyuan-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/sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills/code-review-expert)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills/code-review-expert"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills/code-review-expert/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/sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills/code-review-expert"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills/code-review-expert.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk pass
- 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 | $0.00032 | $0.01273 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00509 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00255 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00127 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-expert 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 — 157 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Expert
Overview
Perform a structured review of the current git changes with focus on SOLID, architecture, removal candidates, and security risks. Default to review-only output unless the user asks to implement changes.
Severity Levels
| Level | Name | Description | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| P0 | Critical | Security vulnerability, data loss risk, correctness bug | Must block merge |
| P1 | High | Logic error, significant SOLID violation, performance regression | Should fix before merge |
| P2 | Medium | Code smell, maintainability concern, minor SOLID violation | Fix in this PR or create follow-up |
| P3 | Low | Style, naming, minor suggestion | Optional improvement |
Workflow
1) Preflight context
- Use
git status -sb,git diff --stat, andgit diffto scope changes. - If needed, use
rgorgrepto find related modules, usages, and contracts. - Identify entry points, ownership boundaries, and critical paths (auth, payments, data writes, network).
Edge cases:
- No changes: If
git diffis empty, inform user and ask if they want to review staged changes or a specific commit range. - Large diff (>500 lines): Summarize by file first, then review in batches by module/feature area.
- Mixed concerns: Group findings by logical feature, not just file order.
2) SOLID + architecture smells
- Load
references/solid-checklist.mdfor specific prompts. - Look for:
- SRP: Overloaded modules with unrelated responsibilities.
- OCP: Frequent edits to add behavior instead of extension points.
- LSP: Subclasses that break expectations or require type checks.
- ISP: Wide interfaces with unused methods.
- DIP: High-level logic tied to low-level implementations.
- When you propose a refactor, explain why it improves cohesion/coupling and outline a minimal, safe split.
- If refactor is non-trivial, propose an incremental plan instead of a large rewrite.
What ships with it
6 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 · 157 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 976a50590858
code-review-expert is a skill published in the GitHub repository sanyuan0704/sanyuan-skills (3,965 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,273 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…