Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to singula-ai/alego. 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/singula-ai/alego/main/.agents/skills/alego-code-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/singula-ai/alegoWrote 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/singula-ai/alego/alego-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/singula-ai/alego/alego-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/singula-ai/alego/alego-code-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/singula-ai/alego/alego-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/singula-ai/alego/alego-code-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 | $0.00052 | $0.02159 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00864 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00432 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00216 |
Grade A, and why
alego-code-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 6d 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.
This is a copy
81% identical to dsh-code-review — 27 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 62 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewing an Alego PR
This skill is guidance, not a complete checklist. Verify and fetch the PR's live base and exact head, then run pnpm --silent run change-scope --base <verified-base-ref> --head <verified-head-ref> before reading the diff and enough surrounding code to understand the design. The report identifies paths and dirty layers but does not replace semantic review. Re-establish the base and rerun it after a retarget or merge. Prioritize correctness, lifecycle, security, and broken required behavior over style; a short review with one substantiated blocker is better than a list of nits.
Read the requirements before judging the diff. Map the changed paths to the artifacts below, open each owning page from Sources of truth, and only then read the diff against those requirements. Judging a diff against memory of the rules is how a violation passes review.
Sources of truth
- AGENTS.md and packages/AGENTS.md: standing repository and package authoring rules.
- docs/defensive-patterns/: the architecture requirements a change must satisfy and the habits behind them. Each page owns one artifact; read every page the diff touches:
- general.md — timing, async state, value representation, shared ownership, decentralization, refactors, migrations, performance evidence, disposal, callbacks, subprocesses.
- package-surface.md — exports, package shape, build faces, dependency declarations, resolve hooks.
- remote-and-api.md — remote services,
@Remotemethods, API dispatch, business ownership inpackages/api. - client-components.md — client components, slots, stores, hooks, effects, shared base packages.
- conversation-and-session.md — projection reads, Session retention, conversation nodes, renderers.
- docs/AGENTS.md: documentation placement and prose discipline.
- alego-prose-standard: required coverage and editorial judgment for comments, docs, prompts, and visible strings.
- alego-ci-test-reliability: isolation and regression-proof rules for resource-owning, asynchronous, or flaky tests and fixtures.
- alego-client-ui-ux: feedback-surface choice, overlay safety, platform window adaptation, and visual token discipline for product-user-visible GUI changes.
- alego-error-handling: failure classification, handling ownership, containment, state guarantees, and actionable reports.
- docs/testing.md and the quality-gates reference: required test tiers and gates.
- Agent Notes: design rationale. Treat disagreement with an Agent Note as a design discussion, not an automatic veto.
- For bilingual changes, read translation-rules.md and terminology.md; the extended translation skill is outside automatic review and runs only on explicit user invocation.
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.
- 6d ago Changed · +8 lines b9015d6820a6
- 26d ago Changed · +1 lines cdb506550906
- 1mo ago Changed · +3 lines 318699b8e8af
- 1mo ago First seen · 50 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 1dfc68d8fe06
alego-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository singula-ai/alego (109 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 2,159 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 81% identical to dsh-code-review, differing in 27 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
aster-config
Reference for aster.yaml, covering review models, analyzers, focus areas, include/exclude globs, minconfidence, and the permissions block that gates edits. Use when creating or editing aster.yaml, choosing hypothesis/verify models, enabling semgrep or ast-grep, or configuring edit permissions.
aster-fix-workflow
Pipe aster review findings into aster fix to generate and apply patches safely, using review --json, fix --findings-json, dry-run inspection, --apply, and permission gating. Use when asked to auto-fix review findings, apply aster's suggested edits, or build a review-then-fix pipeline.
aster-review-ci
Run aster code reviews non-interactively in CI, GitHub Actions, or from another agent. Covers aster review --pr, --json, --stream, --comment, diff-from-stdin, token handling, and filtering findings. Use when wiring aster into a pipeline, posting PR comments, or parsing review output programmatically.
generic-fullstack-code-reviewer
Review full-stack code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, input validation, GPU-accelerated animations, and design system consistency. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing pull requests.
generic-react-code-reviewer
Review React/TypeScript code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md workflow compliance. Enforces TypeScript strict mode, GPU-accelerated animations, WCAG AA accessibility, bundle size limits, and surgical simplicity. Use when completing features, before commits, or…
generic-static-code-reviewer
Review static site code for bugs, security issues, performance problems, accessibility gaps, and CLAUDE.md compliance. Enforces pure HTML/CSS/JS standards, minimal page weight, mobile-first design. Use when completing features, before commits, or reviewing changes.