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 sequenzia/agent-alchemy --skill code-qualitygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sequenzia/agent-alchemyWrote 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/sequenzia/agent-alchemy/code-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sequenzia/agent-alchemy/code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sequenzia/agent-alchemy/code-quality/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/sequenzia/agent-alchemy/code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sequenzia/agent-alchemy/code-quality.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 | $0.00033 | $0.01803 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00721 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00361 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00180 |
Grade A, and why
code-quality 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- code-quality — 92% identical, 5 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 347 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Quality
This skill provides code quality principles and best practices for reviewing and improving implementations.
SOLID Principles
Single Responsibility Principle (SRP)
A class/function should have one reason to change.
Bad:
class UserService {
createUser(data) { /* creates user */ }
sendEmail(user) { /* sends email */ }
generateReport(users) { /* generates report */ }
}
Good:
class UserService {
createUser(data) { /* creates user */ }
}
class EmailService {
sendEmail(user) { /* sends email */ }
}
class ReportService {
generateReport(users) { /* generates report */ }
}
Open/Closed Principle (OCP)
Open for extension, closed for modification.
Bad: Adding new payment types requires modifying existing code
function processPayment(type, amount) {
if (type === 'credit') { /* ... */ }
else if (type === 'debit') { /* ... */ }
// Must modify to add new types
}
Good: New payment types can be added without modification
interface PaymentProcessor {
process(amount: number): Promise<void>;
}
class CreditProcessor implements PaymentProcessor { /* ... */ }
class DebitProcessor implements PaymentProcessor { /* ... */ }
Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP)
Subtypes must be substitutable for their base types.
Bad:
class Bird {
fly() { /* ... */ }
}
class Penguin extends Bird {
fly() { throw new Error("Can't fly!"); } // Violates LSP
}
Good:
class Bird { /* ... */ }
class FlyingBird extends Bird {
fly() { /* ... */ }
}
class Penguin extends Bird { /* no fly method */ }
Interface Segregation Principle (ISP)
Clients shouldn't depend on interfaces they don't use.
Bad:
interface Worker {
work(): void;
eat(): void;
sleep(): void;
}
Good:
interface Workable { work(): void; }
interface Eatable { eat(): void; }
interface Sleepable { sleep(): void; }
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 · 347 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 690cb8ed81cc
code-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository sequenzia/agent-alchemy (45 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,803 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
arrow-maintenance
Navigation and audit overlay for linked-intent development. Use when working with docs/arrows/ — orienting via index.yaml, auditing spec-to-code coherence, detecting reverse orphans and drift, splitting/merging/renaming/re-parenting segments. Dual-mode: ambient guidance when the overlay is present…
review-depth
Experimental declared review depth for linked-intent development. Use when a LID project's instruction file declares a review depth in prose (e.g. "Review depth - I review through LLD; below that, consolidate to one review") or the user asks to batch phase reviews, consolidate stops, or let go below a phase depth.…
bidirectional-differential
Audit coherence across an arrow of intent by running two parallel fresh Claude sessions — one reconstructs code from a single EARS, the other reconstructs the EARS from stripped code — then classifies the drift between them. Use when the user invokes /differential-audit, asks to audit EARS-to-code drift for a feature…
review
Structured code review with parallel audit agents, confidence-scored triage, and optional auto-fix. Examines uncommitted changes, staged diffs, commit ranges, or specific paths. Produces a tiered report (MUST-FIX / RECOMMENDED / NIT) backed by evidence, then optionally applies fixes with verification.
write-tests
Write tests for existing production code. Processes ONE file at a time through a full pipeline: analyze, inventory (frozen BEFORE writing), write, executable coverage gate, verify, blind coverage audit, adversarial review, log. Uses CodeSift for discovery and analysis when available. Modes: [path] (specific target)…
db-audit
Database performance and safety audit. 70+ checks across 13 dimensions (DB1-DB13): query patterns, indexes, schema design, connections, transactions, migrations, caching, query optimization, ORM anti-patterns, observability, data lifecycle, DB security, and migration deployment safety. Code-level checks for all ORMs.…