Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to seanrreid/RAD_framework. 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/seanrreid/RAD_framework/main/.agents/skills/quality-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/seanrreid/RAD_frameworkWrote 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/seanrreid/rad_framework/quality-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/seanrreid/rad_framework/quality-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/seanrreid/rad_framework/quality-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/seanrreid/rad_framework/quality-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/seanrreid/rad_framework/quality-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 | $0.00055 | $0.00345 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00138 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00069 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00034 |
Grade A, and why
quality-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 23d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
quality-review
Run a read-only review of security, error handling, null safety, input validation, naming, and project conventions.
Input
Read the text the user wrote after the skill name (optional):
- Empty: review every file changed since branching from the default branch.
- File paths: review only those files.
Resolve the default branch and the changed files with:
BASE=$(scripts/get-default-branch.sh)
git diff "$BASE"...HEAD --name-only
If scripts/get-default-branch.sh exits non-zero, report its stderr and stop.
Process
- Build the file list: the files the user named, or the changed files above.
- Spawn the
quality-reviewersub-agent, defined at.codex/agents/quality-reviewer.toml(it runs withsandbox_mode = "read-only"). Give it the file list and the default branch as context. - Wait for it to finish and report its findings report as written.
Rules
- Never edit, create, or delete files. Never commit or push.
- If the sub-agent cannot be spawned, say so and stop; do not review the files yourself in its place.
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.
- 23d ago First seen · 39 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A e23541e29013
quality-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository seanrreid/RAD_framework (5 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 345 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 2026-10-06.
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"…
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…
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…
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…