review

A code-review tool that runs a standard review of the changes in a local Git repository. Git is a system that records changes to source code.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review uncommitted changes, branch differences, or changes compared with a chosen base branch.
Why use it?
It provides a separate review of the current working changes, helping identify problems before they are merged or released.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/sendbird/cc-plugin-codex/review
Any agent
npx skills add sendbird/cc-plugin-codex --skill review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sendbird/cc-plugin-codex

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 97 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,785 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00097 $0.02785
Opus 5 $0.00048 $0.01392
Sonnet 5 $0.00019 $0.00557
Haiku 4.5 $0.00010 $0.00279

Measured 2d ago against content hash 25af4db00fc4, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

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 2d 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.

skills/review/SKILL.md · 120 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Claude Code Review

Use this skill when the user wants Claude Code to review the current working tree or a branch diff in this repository.

Use $cc:review as the default when the user asks for code review, asks you to have Claude review something, or wants a second review pass without explicitly asking for stronger adversarial scrutiny. If the user asks for stronger challenge on design, tradeoffs, rollout risk, migration risk, configuration behavior, or provides custom review focus text, route to $cc:adversarial-review instead. If the user wants Claude Code to investigate, validate by changing code, or actually fix/implement something, route to $cc:rescue instead. If the overall request is "you review it too, also ask Claude to review in the background, then you aggregate and fix it", keep the delegated Claude part on $cc:review unless the user explicitly asks for a harsher or more adversarial review. $cc:review does not accept custom focus text. If the user wants to steer Claude toward a particular angle, question, subsystem, or risk area, that is a signal to use $cc:adversarial-review instead.

Resolve <plugin-root> as two directories above this SKILL.md file. Always run the companion from that active plugin root: node "<plugin-root>/scripts/claude-companion.mjs" review ...

Supported arguments: --wait, --background, --base <ref>, --scope auto|working-tree|branch, --model <model>, --effort <low|medium|high|xhigh|max> (defaults: model=opus and no effort; fable, opus, sonnet, and haiku each keep Claude Code's own effort default, and Claude Code owns which effort levels each model supports)

Forward --model unchanged to the companion. The companion trims surrounding whitespace, canonicalizes the friendly aliases fable, opus, sonnet, and haiku to lowercase, then forwards every other --model value unchanged to Claude Code. Claude Code owns alias resolution and supported effort levels; /model is the authoritative picker for the current account and provider.

Raw slash-command arguments: $ARGUMENTS

Rules:

  • This skill is review-only. Do not fix issues, apply patches, or suggest that you are about to make changes.
  • Before launching the review, stay in read-only inspection mode: inspect git status and diff stats only, then ask at most one user question about whether to wait or run in background.
  • Preserve the user's review scope flags exactly.
  • Do not accept staged-only or unstaged-only review modes.
  • Do not add extra review instructions or focus text. Route those requests to $cc:adversarial-review.

Execution mode rules:

  • If the raw arguments include --wait, do not ask. Run the review in the foreground.
  • If the raw arguments include --background, do not ask. Run the review in background through the built-in review subagent path.
  • Otherwise, estimate the review size before asking:
    • For working-tree review, start with git status --short --untracked-files=all.
    • For working-tree review, also inspect both git diff --shortstat --cached and git diff --shortstat.
    • For base-branch review, use git diff --shortstat <base>...HEAD.
    • Treat untracked files or directories as reviewable work even when git diff --shortstat is empty.
    • Only conclude there is nothing to review when the relevant working-tree status is empty or the explicit branch diff is empty.
    • Recommend waiting only when the review is clearly tiny, roughly 1-2 files total and no sign of a broader directory-sized change.
    • In every other case, including unclear size, recommend background.
    • When in doubt, run the review instead of declaring that there is nothing to review.
  • Then ask the user once which execution mode to use, offering two options with the recommended one first and its label suffixed (Recommended):
    • Wait for results
    • Run in background
  • Use a question tool for that ask only when this thread actually has one. Codex exposes request_user_input by default in interactive threads and hides it only when [tools] experimental_request_user_input = false, and it does not exist in non-interactive threads. If you have no question tool but a user is reading this thread, ask in your own reply and stop there. In a non-interactive thread with no user to answer, skip the ask and proceed with the recommended mode. Never spin on a wait or collaboration tool looking for a picker this thread does not have.

Read the full file on GitHub · 120 lines

Files

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.

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 120 lines · 97 tokens per session scan A 25af4db00fc4

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review is a skill published in the GitHub repository sendbird/cc-plugin-codex (182 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 97 tokens to every session and 2,785 once invoked, about $0.0005 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

codedrobe-theme

Create, inspect, convert, apply, replace, verify, troubleshoot, update, publish, or restore reversible CodeDrobe themes for supported Chromium/Electron AI desktop apps, including OpenAI Codex, Tencent WorkBuddy, QoderWork (CN/global), and TRAE SOLO (global/CN). Use when a user asks to turn an attached or local…

CodeDrobe/skills · 181 tokens

codedrobe-adapter-dev

Add, inspect, repair, or validate CodeDrobe Core adapters for Chromium/Electron AI desktop applications. Use when supporting a new app, updating Codex or WorkBuddy compatibility after an app release, discovering installation paths or CDP targets, selecting stable DOM landmarks, adding renderer profiles or…

CodeDrobe/skills · 81 tokens

rulesync

Generates and syncs AI rule configuration files (.cursorrules, CLAUDE.md, copilot-instructions.md) across 20+ coding tools from a single source. Use when syncing AI rules, running rulesync commands, importing or generating rule files, or managing shared AI coding configurations.

dyoshikawa/rulesync · 64 tokens

agent-workspace-linux

Use when a task needs an isolated hidden Linux desktop or workspace-owned browser: GUI app QA, web/browser/shopping automation, sandboxed app observation, or stale workspace cleanup. Routes agent-workspace-linux MCP tools on demand. Does NOT apply to host desktop/Chrome control, generic MCP setup, or pure code/file…

ilysenko/codex-desktop-linux · 70 tokens

ss-component

Generate a new UI component following the StyleSeed design conventions.

bitjaru/styleseed · 14 tokens

loongsuite-pilot-insight

基于 LoongSuite Pilot / AI Coding Agent 日志生成事件洞察、组织洞察、数据质量、研发效能和 AI Native 使用类 SLS 报表时使用;包含 AI Coding 事件表语义,以及团队报表可选的部门维表、deptuser 组织关系、指标口径和公共 CTE,通常与 sls-dashboard-builder 一起使用。.

alibaba/loongsuite-pilot · 91 tokens